July 1, 2016

Minister.

Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr.
Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I thought what I explained was
that this is a more flexible and less costly structure to
set up. That means for a small business, they may
prefer setting up an LLC as opposed to a corporate
structure or a partnership. And the advantage of an LLC as compared to a partnership is that an LLC pr ovides the ability to have protection against personal
liability. So it is kind of a hybrid between a company
and a partnership.
A number of people use partnerships here
because they are sim ple; but they do not provide personal protection against liability. And that is one of the
advantages here. So in relation to what the uptake is
going to be, whether it will be adopted in great numbers locally, I think that remains to be seen. But from
our perspective, it should have a lot of use, partic ularly for smaller, start -up types of companies that do
not want to have the expense of going through a lot of
the legal work required to set up a corporate structure.
As far as the international side is concerned, this is
something that a lot of US fund managers are looking
for. And it is something that we think will bring additional business here, in particular for something like a private equity fund or others. And as a consequence
of that, we will see mor e work locally for those provi ding services to international business, which would
then translate into employment as well. Thank you.

Yes, yes.

SUPPLEMENTARY

Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Minister, with nearly a mi llion LLCs having been formed in Delaware, obviously
you must have some faith that this can be of some
assistance and help to Bermuda. In making that determination to bring thi s to the House, can you give us
any indication as to how many you think might actually use Bermuda to form an LLC?

Minister.
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I cannot give a quantitative a nswer because, wi thout being cute, I do not have a
crystal ball. But I will say this is something that has
come up fairly regularly in discussions with overseas
law firms and overseas providers on the international
business side, and it is something that would certainly
be of benefit to Bermuda from a competitive perspective. But to be able to put a number on at this point, I
think, is pretty premature.


Bermuda House of Assembly

Thank you.
The Chair will recognise the Honourable
Member from constituency 6, MP Wayne Furbert, for a
supplementary.

SUPPLEMENTARY

Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Mr. Speaker, the biggest
question I have always wanted to ask is this. The Mi nister talks about a significant piece of legislation. He
talks about 800,000 formed already in the United States, and the Cayman Islands are ahead of us.
When are we ever going to be ahead of the Cayman Islands so that we are laying down legislation before
they do?

Minister.

Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
The interesting thing about the Cayman I slands is they started their work on this some five years
ago. And we only started to work on this two years
ago. So I think the answer, to some degree, resides
with the former Government who, had they started this
process earlier, we might have been there three years
ago. But I think it is interesting to compare the two. The Cayman legislation was just brought into oper ation a couple of weeks ago. So in some respects we
are not that far behind. They have been talking about
it for some time. But, as Honourable Members will see
when they get a copy, this is quite a lengthy piece of
legislation. It is also equivalent to another Companies Act in its own right. And we have had a lot of good
cooperation between the private sector and Gover nment on this one to get it moved forward.
But it has only taken us two years. It took
Cayman five years. And as I said, had things started sooner under a former Government, we would have been there by now. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Minister.

Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Mr. Speaker, I would
prefer to get into that when we actually debate the legislation and I can set out more clearly who the
players were. But suffice it to say that the private sector contributed enormously to this in terms of providing assistance. It came through the BDA [Bermuda Bus iness Development Agency] process. And the answer is no, we did not pay for that contribution from the pr ivate sector.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and
good morning, colleagues.
Mr. Speaker, given that this represents a new
approach for doing a corporate structure in Bermuda,
can the Minister confirm that the same dichotomy between local companies and international companies
will pertain to this structure whe n fully developed; i.e.,
some will be able to operate in Bermuda, others will
not be able to operate, based on the particular structure and ownership?

Minister.

Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am a little concerned we are
getting into the debate here; we are anticipating the
debate at this stage. And I have set out some of those answers already in the Statement in terms of the fact
that this combines elements of both the company and a partnership and why this has benefits. So I prefer
not to get into this whole- scale, with your permission.
Thank you.

First, let me just quickly say
that I would like to join in with the Minister for all of the
accolades for what we see happening in our Bermuda
public schools.
My question is this for the Honourable Mini ster: Minister, given many of the successes that we
now see taking place, what processes are being put in
place to assist and ensure that our graduates who
have the Dual [Enrolment] Associates Programme, as well as coming out of high school at the same time,
are able, once they graduate with that associate’s d egree, to secure employment within their area? What
programmes are we putting in place? Because we are
looking at some people who are now just 16 years old
going back. And we need to ensure that those types of graduates are able to smoothly transition into wor kforce. And I believe it is incumbent upon education.

Minister.

Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Yes, thank you.
That is wh ere some of the Career Pathways
go in tandem with doing enrolment. And a lot of what is
being done with these students is they have been working with industry partners to provide support for them, to provide mentorship, and to give them e mployment opportun ities.
Now, all of these students who have graduated with the Dual Enrolment Programme at this point
are continuing on with their tertiary education. But it is
something that we recognise that we have an opportunity for them. We are going to continue to do more
to ensure that our children have the opportunity.
And while I am on that, with the Career Pat hways, our goal is to actually even push that further
down into the middle schools so we start seeing some
more opportunities even from there.

Minister.
Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Yes. Just to clarify th at and
make the Member and the public aware, actually, especially with nursing, having an Associate’s Degree in
Nursing is just the first step. You have the licensing as
well, and I believe the licensing tests are coming up
very shortly. I think there was about a four -to-six-week
delay from when the associate was actually given to the next sitting of that [exam] would be. And for nur sing, you actually . . . the next step is to be licensed by
passing those exams. And then you are golden. So I
do not think there will be an issue once the people who have successfully completed the associate’s degree successfully pass their licensing.

Minister.

Hon. R. Wayne Sco tt: Mr. Speaker, I do not have that
information. I can say that, you know, between our
two schools, we had a couple of hundred children who actually graduated, which was really good to see. The
average GPA throughout every last student? I do not
have that information. The intent of my Statement was
to highlight the achievements, to talk about some of
the good things happening. I do not have a forensic
accounting breakdown of all that information for the Member from constituency 6, who is really asking that
question, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Honourable Minister should be aware that
last year’s results issued that exact information that my colleague asked for. So the question that I am
asking as a supplemental is, will the Ministry commit
to producing these reports, using standardised repor ting so we can compare year to year? Instead of co ming with reports that just are highlighting the best of
the results, instead of giving us the entire picture?

Yes.
Minister.

Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Mr. Speaker, referring back to
that Member’s own information, the Ministry does pr oduce that information. I do not have that with me with this Ministerial Statement, as I thought I clearly artic ulated. But these are things that the Ministry does routinely produce. If not, he would not have had the i nformation that he just talked about from last year.

Minister.

2300 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Mr. Speaker, I will bring that
information to the House as soon as it is available to
me. As I also stated in my Statement, I w ill make a
point to keep the public and this House updated on our students’ achievements. As a matter of fact, the next thing I will probably be talking about is some of the achievements we are doing with our STEM pr ogramme, because we actually have just f inished some
training. We actually have students who are starting
next week on programme —

Thank you.
The Chair will now recogni se the Honourable
Member from constituency 29. You have a question?

QUESTION 1 : 2016 SENIOR SCHOOL GRADU ATIONS

Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Yes, Mr. Speaker.
Minister, very good news indeed. What I
would like to ask you, though, is do you have the number of students who failed this year, and what are
you as a Minister planning to do to . . . do you have
any priority in helping those who may have fallen short
of their graduation?

All right. Thank you, MP De Silva.
Minister.
Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Yes, Mr. Speaker. I want to
answer that question this way, and I will refer to the Ministerial Statement, where it outlined that with one
of the schools there were 22 students who actually did
not graduate, but will be eligible to once they complete
the summer school. So we actually provide every o pportunity. And it is our hope that every child reaches
his or her potential and graduates. And we do provide
that help. And we need to continue to do that. So we
do have a lot of positive things. Unfortunately , Mr.
Speaker, we hear of the 10 per cent dysfunction, and
that tends to be our view of public school. And that is not the case, and that is the main intention of being
here today —to let Members and the public know that
there are good things. And we will c ontinue to work
toward 100 per cent attainment of these goals, which
is a lofty goal, but that is what we would love to see.

Yes.
SUPPLEMENTARY

Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Minister, you said that one
school had 22. You did not give the number, I do not
think, for the other school. But just if we use that 22
for an example, will you as the Minister be pushing
these 22? Because, as we know, our young people,
sometimes, when they get out of the arena, you have
lost them for good. So, Minister, what I ask is, that
those who have failed, will they be under any, for lack of a better word, pressure from you as the Minister or
your Ministry to encourage them to try and get the
percentage they need to succeed thereafter?

Minister?

Hon. R. Wayne Scott: Yes, it is a good question, Mr.
Speaker. And I pointed to one school. The other
school, off the top of my head, I believ e there were
seven or so. In all instances, all of these kids have the
opportunity and are being encouraged to complete the
summer school so they can achieve that.
This is where, however, Mr. Speaker, we
need to get all of us involved and the public invol ved
and families involved because, you know, the Ministry of Education has a legal remit up to a certain point. And there is only so much we can do. As the comm unity and as families, we need to also encourage our children to not give up and continue to pur sue. As we
talked about a couple of weeks ago with some of the
alternative education that we had graduations for, this
is a perfect example of students who, for whatever reason, came off the normal course. But that term is
also relative. They stuck with it ; they were able to
achieve; and there were many reasons why these kids
were not able to complete their degrees in school. But there are alternatives.
So, as a community, Mr. Speaker, I think it is
important for all of us to encourage our students to not
give up, because there are many avenues to achieve
success.

Minister, keeping in mind the
legalities that now allow students to remain in school up unt il the age of 18, for those who do reach the
graduation requirements and are able to graduate, like
I said, at the age of 16 or so, and are not able to move
on to tertiary education for whatever reason —let us
say, for lack of funding— is there something in place
by the Ministry, since they are legally able to stay in school (for free) that will assist these students to be able to continue, given that legally they can remain in
school up until age 18? Thank you.

Yes, Minister.
Hon. R. Wayne Sco tt: Yes. I think, Mr. Speaker, we
are getting way off the scope here into legal defin itions of stuff. But I think I know where you are going
with that. And there are many opportunities with scholarships that are offered by the Government,
which I would lik e to see significantly modified so that
we can provide a lot more opportunities for students
even through our own Bermuda College. I think we
have opportunities as a community that we have not
fully recognised. And I will certainly do my part to try
to see how we can get as many children who want to
continue their education to continue their education.

All righ t. Thank you.
The Chair will recognise first the Honourable
Premier.
Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning with, I am
sure, the full support of honourable colleagues in the
House to pay a brief tribute to a tr ue public servant, a
fearless advocate and a woman of high ideals and
values, a former colleague of some of ours in the
House, the Honourable Ann Cartwright De Couto, who
passed away recently. As you said, Mr. Speaker, the
former Honourable Member served f rom 1980 to
1998.
Mr. Speaker, I think when people reflect back
on Ann Cartwright De Couto, the first thing that comes to many people’s mind is the 1990 policy banning use
of fish pots in Bermuda. I can simply say about that
period in time that the former Honourable Member
was a lady who was not for turning at any time. She
took some serious public condemnation for her stance
in this area, but at the end of the day, her spirit cer-tainly exemplified some qualities that she carried with
her through all her l ife—strength, commitment to her
principle, and one of the things that I always got a
chuckle from was her razor -sharp wit. And now, as we
look back on that policy some 16, 17 years, we see
that it was the right thing to do.
Mr. Speaker, I honestly believ e that first and
foremost in Ann Cartwright De Couto’s character was her loyalty to the people of Bermuda in every stand
that she took. I also recall her stand against the franchise Bill, which I believe, Mr. Speaker, she fought all the way to the Privy Council. And at the time, when asked about it, she said it was simply the right thing to
do and in the best interests of all of the people of
Bermuda. She was certainly a very formidable Member of this House and came prepared for every debate. And I have to say she did not suffer fools gladly.
I can recall, in an era when politics were less
personal, she counted amongst her personal friends a
former Member, the Honourable Dame Lois BrowneEvans, and Honourable Member L. F. Wade, and could often be seen in th e recreation areas of the
House holding court and talking about issues. And in spite of their being on the other side of the political
fence and having fierce debates, she always conducted herself in a most appropriate manner.
Mr. Speaker, I can remember very clearly the
debate on capital punishment that went all through the night and into the early morning. And when you get
into those long debates, obviously, Mr. Speaker, they
drag on and you are with colleagues for a long period
of time and there are man y interesting speeches. And
all of a sudden, Ann Cartwright De Couto disa ppeared. No one knew where she was. She came back at about 5:30 in the morning fresh, proper, with a new
red dress on, and stood back to her feet, where the
Honourable Deputy Speaker stands at this time, and
gave one of the most scintillating speeches that I have
ever heard in my life—full of wit, full of very sharp points. And even at six o’clock in the morning, it captured the attention of everyone in this Honourable
House who was pa ying attention at the time. She certainly had a way about her.
And outside of the House, Mr. Speaker, the
former Member served with distinction in a family law
practice. There were many people who were facing
spousal problems and they ran to her to be the first in
the door to deal with her. And she certainly cast her-self to be in a position of prominence in that area. She
was a mother, a family member and a matriarch in the
family.
On behalf of all of the colleagues in the
House, I would like to send condolences to the family
during this most difficult period, from Members of the House and the people of Bermuda. Thank you, sir.

All right. Thank you. Thank you, Pr emier.
2302 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly The Chair will recognise the Honourable
Member from constituency 5, MP D. V. Burgess.

Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I would like for this House to
send condolences to the family of Mrs. Ruby Woolridge. You would probably know (but if you do not),
Ruby Woolridge was the niece of L. Frederic k Wade,
and also the mother of Ricky Woolridge, a lawyer, Mr. Speaker, and a long- time member of the PLP and ce rtainly a long- time member of the Bermuda Industrial
Union. She was fearless and a strong supporter of the
Progressive Labour Party. I would like to associate the
Premier, Michael Dunkley, and the entire House.
Also, Mr. Speaker, I would like to send congratulations out to Nirobi Mills. He is from Hamilton
Parish. He is 13 years old. He has been selected to go to England in the Under -14 cricket team, and also
the Under -17. He is the youngest Bermudian to be
selected in the Under -17 squad, at 13 years old, Mr.
Speaker, and one of the youngest in the world to be
selected in the Under -17 team for the ICC tournament, which will be held in Texas. Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.

Thank you, Honourable Member.
The Chair will now recognise the Minister for
Economic Development, Dr. Grant Gibbons.

Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to ask that the
House send congratulations to the African Methodist
Episcopal Church on their bicentennial celebrations,
which start, as you probably know, Mr. Speaker, this
weekend in Philadelphia. With your permission, I just
wanted to give a couple of comments from their actual
celebratory note that went out with some history.
“It was in 1816 that the African Methodist
Episcopal Church became the first denomination organised by people of African descent to be incorporated in the United States. That year, Richard Allen,
because he became its first elected and consecrated
Bishop, the AME Church is unique in that it is the first
major religious denomination in the Western World to
be established as a response to sociological rather
than theological differences. It was born as a protest
against racial discrimination and slavery; today, the
AME church has members in 20 Episcopal districts located in 39 countries on 5 continents. The denom ination’s commitment to serve the needs of people worldwide is administered by 21 active bishops and 9
general officers who manage t he departments of the
church.”
Mr. Speaker, I am sure I can associate the
whole House in extending congratulations, given the
significant influence and contribution that the African
Methodist Episcopal Church has made in Bermuda. Mr. Speaker, while on my feet, I would also
like to be associated with the condolences to the fam-ily of the late Ann Cartwright De Couto. The Honourable Premier used the words, The lady is not retur ning. I would have said, the Iron Lady . As you will
know, Mr. Speaker, I was occasionally on the wrong
side of the debate as far as she was concerned. The
McDonald’s, and the Prohibited Restaurants Bill, was
quite a passionate and active debate. But I will say
that she was a constituent of mine and was very supportive in later years, although we did obviously di sagree on the Prohibited Restaurants Bill.
Members on this side often got phone calls
from Ann, and she usually had a piece of advice, or something stronger, to give to us. But suffice it to say
she was certainly a passionate politician, clearly, clearly someone who spoke on what she believed in and someone who made a huge contribution to Ber-muda, not only in the fish pot ban, but certainly in
other areas as well. And I would ask that condolences
be sent to her family, sons, Doug [and Jesse].
Mr. Speaker, while I am on my feet, I would
also like to ask that condolences be sent to the family of the late Heather Correia. Honourable Members will
know Heather Correia as the spouse of the lat e Allan
Correia, who ran the Parakeet Restaurant for many,
many years. A lovely lady has been taken before her time, but we would ask that condolences be sent to
her two children, Jonathan and Allison, but a very nice
person indeed. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Honourable Minister.
The Chair will recognise the Honourable
Member from constituency 6, MP Wayne Furbert.

Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to be associated
with the comments in regards t o Ann Cartwright De
Couto. The time of her death at 71, as far as I am
concerned, is very young. I was fortunate myself.
Definitely the Honourable Grant Gibbons and I believe
the Honourable Bob Richards served with her in
Cabinet at the time. And the Honourable Member is
definitely right. She was very fiery in those locations. I
remember particularly the McDonald’s franchise situa-tion because the Honourable Member Grant Gibbons
was the Minister of Finance, and trying to figure out a
way of how to . . . at those times, the argument was
that franchises could not be brought into Bermuda,
mainly because of how our money policies were concerned. Of course, Grant found a loophole , and was
able to find a way to get it here.

[Laughter and inaudible interjections ]

Hon. Wayne L. Furbert: But Ann Cartwright De
Couto was very serious about fighting this issue, as
you will recall. As a matter of fact, her best debates were when she came back after lunch, having had a


Bermuda House of Assembly little ginger ale. She sat in that corner, right ther e
where the Honourable Suzann Roberts -Holshouser
[sits], and made her great speech on McDonald’s. And
she called it the mother of all franchises. And she said
that if it looks like a duck and it walks like a duck, then
it is a duck. And so, that is why we have the franchise
law [Prohibited Restaurant Act 1997] today.
But you may not also remember that she was
trying to build some apartments, suggested building
apartments at Back o’ Town for our foreign workers,
which set off a firestorm in that circle. The y felt they
were putting all the international business in an area all by themselves. But she was very bold. She also
was the one who pushed the Honourable Member, the
Premier at the time, John Swan, in bringing a Bill for
the referendum, Bill for independence. I guess she
thought Sir John was not going to bring it. She said,
You’d better bring that Bill before I pass it , and he
brought the referendum Bill and did the referendum
Bill on independence. Then it formed other groups
after that which caused a storm in Bermuda.
But she will definitely be remembered for her
fiery remarks in this House. She always was the one who mainly responded to the Opposition in regard to
the Budget. And she did not mince her words. She
hardly ever used notes. But Ann Cartwright De Couto
will be missed, and I send my condolences to her fa mily and congratulate her for the service that she has
done over the years, for Bermuda in particular. Thank
you.

Mr. Speaker, I rise this
morning to ask that this Honourable House send congratul ations to all of the young athletes who partic ipated in the Clarien Iron Kids race this past Saturday.
I was in attendance with my colleagues, MP Leah
Scott and MP Susan Jackson. And even though it was
scorching hot down there, everyone seemed to have
such a great time. I think the most popular race, Mr.
Speaker, was the three- to six -year-olds, the Tiny
Tots—watching them run from out of the water and
take it so serious, getting on their bikes and then ru nning to the finish line. But I just want to recogni se the
Tot Females with the fastest times, and they were Miss Jessie Marshall, Miss M eghan Hann and Miss
Amber Simons. And the top fastest males were Mr.
Nicholas Pilgrim, Mr. Tommy Marshall and Yaneek Pilliar.
During the presentation, they also made r emarks that this is the race that started off the likes of Flora Duffy and Tyler Butterfield. So we will be looking
out for all of these young athletes in the future, Mr.
Speaker, as they represent Bermuda, as they go on to
represent Bermuda. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I rise to ask this Honourable House to send a
letter of congratulations to the Alpha Phi Alpha Frater-nity, Incorporated, Epsilon Beta Lambda Chapter . . .
of which I am a member; I declare my interest. And
we had our annual Alphas versus Kappas Football
Match last week, Mr. Speaker. And although I was not able to play because I was debating the Civil Aviation
Authority Act, we ended up winning 3- nothing.
This is our second year in a row. So we are
two-time champions and curr ent champions. The first
goal was scored by Brother Quinelle Robinson. The second goal was scored by Brother Zory Darrell . And
the third goal, Mr. Speaker, now that is a special one
because it was a tag team because it was between
our all -time leading assist player, Brother Shannon
Dyer . And the third goal was scored by Brother A nthony Davi s, who beat former Bermuda National
Keeper Nigel Burgess with a shot in the upper 90. Mr.
Speaker, that was an exciting game there.
And I also have to send a letter of congratul ations to the keeper, Brother Jason Wade, who actually took my place. I usuall y am the starting keeper there.
But because I was doing my constitutional duties here
with the Honourable Minister Grant Gibbons and gi ving him a hard time on the floor here, Jason Wade
was giving them a hard time on the National St adium’s carpet there, where he even stopped a penalty
shot by their all -time leading scorer, who is Nigel Burgess there, as well.
The main thing is that this was not just for
bragging rights. It is also a charity match, where we, as the two fraternal organisations here, the Alph as
and the Kappas, give back to local schools and char ities. What we did is we raised $1,000, and we gave the proceeds to Port Royal Primary School. And we
also gave it to Matilda Smith Williams Rest Home. So
once again, I would like to congratulate my fraternal
brothers. And I think I can associate the fraternal brothers who are in the House here, and also Coach
James Howard. He did a good job. And every Alpha
Brother played, and every Alpha Brother played well,
so we won 3- nothing. I think they should soon change
the name of the Kappa Classic to the Alpha Classic, or maybe we can give them some lessons on how to
play some football.

[Laughter]

2304 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly Mr. W. Lawrence Scott: So we look forward to beating them next year, Mr. Speaker. And thank you very
much.

The S peaker: All right. Thank you, Honourable Member.
The Chair will recognise the Honourable
Member from constituency 4, the Deputy Speaker.

Thank you, and
good morning.
I would like the House to recognise not only
the hard work that the Coalition for the Protection of
Children have put in over the many, many years, but
certainl y to take this opportunity, Mr. Speaker, to recognise one Kelly Hunt. And I would believe that
probably the whole House would like to recognise
Kelly Hunt as the new Executive Director, taking over
from Sheelagh Cooper. This is a non- governmental
independe nt organisation. They have not received
funding, to keep their independence strong. They are
certainly one of the most important child advocate or-ganisations in Bermuda. Enough cannot be said about
the individual, Kelly Hunt, who has put her heart into
her family, her own two children and towards the
hearts of our children.
We often say, ourselves, how the children are
our main responsibility because they are our future.
But if it were not for the programmes that are esta blished and put in, and the advocac y supplied by the
Coalition and the likes of Kelly Hunt, we would be no further ahead, Mr. Speaker. They have fought dil igently for years. Kelly Hunt is not only a Certified Family Mediator . . . And the House, of course, would
recognise that one of the pi eces of legislation that we
passed in this Honourable House was to recognise
the importance of mediation, and mediation to keep
our families together. It is not the intent of the Coal ition for the Protection of Children to divide families,
but to bring them together.
Kelly Hunt also has the capabilities, the
knowledge and the expertise to focus on children who have experienced sexual abuse and intervention. And
I see other Members putting their hands up, but I will point out this is going to come from the whole House.
Mr. Speaker, again, I need not speak about my feel-ings on child abuse victims. But they have an adv ocate here under the Coalition for the Protection of
Children. And I ask that we sincerely continue to recognise the hard work and applaud the l ikes of Kelly
Hunt, of course recognising Sheelagh Cooper. But we
look forward to supporting Kelly in her endeavours as she continues to be an advocate, as with the Coalition
for the Children of Bermuda. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to be assoc iated with the c ondolences sent to the family of the late
Honourable Ann Cartwright De Couto. In an era when
more and more politicians seem not to act on a consistent set of principles, the Honourable Member cer-tainly did so on a consistent basis. Her action, I con-clude, regarding fish pots was singularly responsible
for revitalising our fish stock. And she should be rec-ognised for that.
We had a difference of view when it came to
the question of independence. But the Honourable Member was kind and gracious enough to serv e on
any panel to discuss the issue that my committee, the
Committee for the Independence of Bermuda, organised to have such discussions. So she spoke consi stently on her principles. She was a fierce advocate.
And we need more people to be consistent. We need
more people to advocate based on their principles,
and then we will have a much more vibrant political
arena.
Mr. Speaker, on a more positive note, I would
like to recognise the tremendous accomplishment of the Leroyfest, which came to an end last Sat urday. I
know the Honourable Member, Jeff Sousa, sent co ngratulatory comments a few weeks ago, but he did not attend the concluding session, the concluding concert
on Saturday night. It was truly a spectacular perfor mance, and it demonstrated the tremendous talent that we have in Bermuda. Honourable Member Susan
Jackson wishes to be associated.
Taylor Rankin is an amazing musician. He
had onstage Joy Barnum, whose voice is intoxicating,
and her stage presence is mesmerising. We have an
abundance of talent in this country, Mr. Speaker. I just
wanted to put into the record the individuals who actually contributed towards the success of this amazing
event. So, we have Taylor Rankin, Joy Barnum, Derek
Simmons, Jahroy Richards , Rowdy Piper, Septimus,
Yesha Towns end, Mak eem, and Aden Pee ts.
Mr. Speaker, if we can marshal this talent that
we have and use it consistently to promote a sense of
cultural vibrancy in this country, we will move ourselves to a much better space and we will recognise
the talent that we have and promote it on a sustained basis. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Honourable Member.


Bermuda House of Assembly The Chair will recognise the Minister for
Health and Seniors.

Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to have congratul ations sent out to two young people, the first to be sent
to Sam Dill. And if any of you have recently read the
newspaper article, Sam was a former Warwick Academy student who won the final year project in Brunel
University, being selected for the New Designers 2016
exhibition. And I think what is so important about the
recipient was the fact that it is showcasing UK desig ners, but also he designed something called “ Eyeassistant,” which is a modular, wireless camera system.
And I must admit, for people like me who are nearsighted, when you read that and realise that all the
opportunities for enhancement and for people who have visual impairment, all the possibilities that this unlocked, not only was I proud for his being a Bermudian, but I was also proud of the fact that for people who have visual impairment, this is going to unlock
something more for them.
The second congratulations, Mr. Speaker, I
would like to have sent is to Brittany Wolffe. Brittany is
a young fashion designer, who has been fortunate to win an internship with the Interview Magazine in New
York. And I must admit, when you look at Brittany and
you see some of the things and some of her designs, I think, as she indicated— and I am saying to myself,
She’s talking about persons who w ear her designs are
people who are not afraid to take chances. And I must
admit, for a woman to have something that is unique
and something different, it is intriguing. I am looking
forward to see some more of the things that she pr oduces.
So, Mr. Speaker , here we have a young man
and a young woman, both of whom are doing things, setting Bermuda on the map. And I must admit, for
me, and hearing Minister Scott earlier, we have so
many young people out there, this is just another ex-ample of Bermudians moving forward in a positive
way.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I woul d like congratulations sent
to the school, Creative Touch. I attended their gradu ation, the first time I have attended a graduation of a
nursery school. But it was actually phenomenal. The
actual school was actually phenomenal, not just the
graduation. But they brought back previous students
to speak. And I was just totally blown away at the level
of organisation that was brought with that.
Mr. Speaker, I would also like to add my congratulations to the Alpha versus Kappa classic. Just to add to my colleag ue, I am not sure that colleagues are
aware that the competition is actually a memorial competition to two Members who did sit within these
walls, Mr. Larry Lowe and Mr. Nelson Bascome. It is
played in recognition of the contributions that they made to the community as a whole.
Mr. Speaker, I normally do not do birthday
wishes, but I would like to have birthday congratul ations sent to my grandmother, who turned 86. As you
know, some relatives are very special within you. My
grandmother is one who has been with me, she
looked after me from being first born, and has been
there for every single milestone that I have accomplished in my life. And it is very special to me to be able to wish her Happy Birthday from these Chambers, because I know she listens not on ly to when I
was in the other place, but she listens to the proceedings up here as well.
And lastly, Mr. Speaker, congratulations sent
to the Bermuda Football Association for the Under -
20s victory over Cayman Islands, their 2- nothing vi ctory. They are mov ing along quite well in this compet ition, and I wish them all the best with the rest of the games they have to play.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

All right. Thank you, Honourable Member.
The Chair will now recognise the Honourable
and Learned Att orney General, Trevor Moniz.

Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Thank you. Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
I would just like to rise to join in sending the
condolence of the House to the family of Ann Car twright De Couto. As Members will know, she was a
great friend of mine over the years. People may not
know that I first went to work for Ann in 1980 when I
first came back to Bermuda, and worked for her for
two years at that time. But I first heard of her when I
was going off as a law student and probably around
1972, I went to work. I took a gap year and worked
with Appleby, where she had worked and had just left.
And she was iconic even at that time, because she had excelled in, I think it was the bar ex-aminations for England and Wales. She had come
second, I think the highest any Bermudian has ever
achieved. And she was very highly rated. She attended University College in London. She had a scholarship from the Inns of Court. She did her pupi llage with some very famous people, Leon Brittan; people like Sir Michael Tugendhat , who is now High
Court Judge—just a list of names from Brit Court. So
she was a high- flyer even in the UK.
She came back to Bermuda to make a contr ibution here, which she did both in matrimonial law in
the legal field, which she always kept up. She was t he
leading advocate in the courts, and also in her public
life as a politician. She was Ann Frith Cartwright in her
2306 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly legal practice and Ann Cartwright De Couto in this
Chamber. She was a very strong individual, a very,
very bright individual, and there was never any subterfuge about her. She was straight -up in everything she
did, and she would put you in your place extremely quickly if she thought you were out of line, as she thought I was on any number of occasions.
Certainly, when she hired me, we immediately
had differences of opinion, because in 1980 she was
elected and very soon became a Minister in the Go vernment. When I came back, my specialty was in i mmigration law and judicial review, and I immediately
began suing the Government and had the thenMinister of Immigration, John Swan, on the witness
stand downstairs. And I was suing the Bermuda
Regiment over conscription. And I was working with
Wendell Hollis, who was an officer in the Regiment, and with Ann Cartwright, who was a Minister in the Government.
And we always had a very cordial and professional relationship in spite of any differences of opi nion we had. So it was much later that we came to
serve in the House together. And certainly, in 1989,
she specifically reached out to me and suggested I
join the UBP and get involved in politics and in public
life. And I followed her advice and have been involved
ever since.
So I ask that the House send condolences.
My father was the first cousin to her husband, Roddy, and Roddy’s brother, his portrait is on the wall here.
Ernest De Couto was a Speaker of the House. So
Ernest and Roddy were cousins of mine, although I
did not know them when I was growing up. And the
children of Ann and Roddy whom they had together, Douglas De Couto and Jesse De Couto, are my se cond cousins. So I send them and their wives and their
children my condolences. She was an exceptional
individual. Certainly what she did with respect to fish
pots was absolutely incredible. And at that time, she
was marched upon and received all sort s of threats.
And she certainly was an Iron Lady in that regard. And
it stood the test of time, as Honourable Members have
said. It was quite outstanding. So I would just like
those to be sent.
I would like to say, I have been asked to
speak at the funeral, which is on Wednesday coming at Saint Ann’s Church in Southampton, where she
comes from. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

All right. Thank you, MP Foggo.
The Chair will now recognise the Honourable
Member from consti tuency 29. MP Zane De Silva, you
have the floor.

Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Thank you. Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I would like this Honourable
House to send congratulations to Dr. Donal Smith. He
recently attended the [UNESCO] International Conf erence on Safeguarding African World Heritage as a
Driver of Sustainable Development that was on
May 31
st to June 4th in Tanzania, Mr. Speaker. Mr.
Speaker, also, it is the first time that a brother from the
African Diaspora has returned to the mother country,
Africa, to support them. And this was welcomed
wholeheartedly by many who attended this confer-ence, Mr. Speaker. And of course, Dr. Smith went on
to give a presentation on the Transmissions Depar tment over at the Transport Control Department. And
that was well received by many, Mr. Speaker. So if we
could do that, I think that it would be well deserved.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Honourable Member.
The Chair will now recognise the Honourable
Minister of Public —excuse me, the Mini ster for Home
Affairs.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: That, too.
[Laughter]
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr.
Speaker, and good morning.
Mr. Speaker, it would be remiss of me to not
stand to my feet to join in the condolence remarks being sent to the family of the late Ann Cartwright De
Couto. You know, there are times when, as Members
of this Honourable House, there are people to whom you look for not just guidance, but people whom you
want to emulate. And I remember before coming here,
having seen Ann Cartwright De Couto in full stride in
this Honourable House, especially during the fish pots
ban situation. It was something to behold. And I
looked at that and thought if I ever went to that place, that is the kind of representation that I would want to
give—bold and assertive and confident. And those
were three words that I believe that explained who
Ann Cartwright De Couto was.
You know, what is interesting is very shortly
after the loss of the United Bermuda Party in 1998,
there was a by -election as the result of the death of
the Paget West MP, Madeline Joell, who passed away in February of 1999. And her seat, once it became


Bermuda House of Assembly vacant, you will recall that Ms. Cartwright De Couto
actually represented Pembroke West Central prior to
the 1998 election. She lost her seat at that time. So
when the Paget West seat became available, Ann Cartwright De Couto and I actually contested that constituency in a sort of a mini -primary for the right to
represent that constituency in this Honourable House.
Needless to say, at the end of the . . . when all
was said and done, I was successful. And I knew that
the example that I had watched in Ann as she travelled the halls and the highways and byways of this House, that I was able to have an example that I could emulate. And what was very interesting to me, when I
knew that all was well between her and me, there was
no negative fallout as a result of my being successful
in winning that seat, was one morning to hear my
telephone ring at home. And on the other end of the phone was Ann Cartwright De Couto, calling me and congratulating me for a particular stand that I had
taken on a debate that we had in the House of A ssembly.
And I knew at that point, Mr. Speaker, that if I
could have been half the person in putt ing in the effort
to the point that I could be recognised by somebody
whom I admired tremendously, then I thought that I
had a reasonably good chance of being successful in
this Honourable House. So I am appreciative to her
for the example that she set. I am grateful to her for the example that she led. And I am saddened for her
family on her very early passing, because at the age
of 71, I think that that is really quite young.

Very young.

Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I know that, as a
youngster, I used to look up to people. You know, at
50 I thought that they were ancient. But now, you
know, when you get closer and closer to that age, 71
is very, very young. And I certainly pass on my cond olences to her sons. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you very much. Thank you.
Would any other Honourable Members care to
speak?
The Chair will recognise the Minister for the
Environment. Minister Cole Simons, you have the floor.

Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker , I rise this morning to send co ngratulatory remarks to Sandys Middle School on their
STEM programme, the AquaFarm. I was there a few
days ago, and I was amazed to see how such an int egrated system was working. I want to particularly
commend Dr. [Timothy] Jackson, the Principal; and
young Andreas Glasgow and Mr. Felicci. This pr ogramme basically teaches the science, technology,
engineering and math programmes. And it teaches
students about biology; it teaches them about entr e-preneurship; it teaches them hands -on experience; it
teaches them responsibility about marine biology. And amazingly, this programme has been going for six
years.
And there is an integrated business model
that they have working there. They access fish. They basically cull, and sell off to Woody’s for their fish
sandwiches. So it is amazing. I had some of the fish
that they culled, and it is a new breed of Bermuda fish.
It was Tilapia grown and harvested there at Sandys.
So to that school, I commend them for this STEM pr oject, and I hope that other schools will follow in this
initiative.
I would like to also commend the team of the
Spirit of Bermuda. They won the tradition class for last
week’s Newport –Bermuda race. In particular, I would
like to commend Captain Stuart Birnie, and navigat or
Larry Rosenfeld; the watch leaders, Jay Kempe and
Alan Burland. And I would just like to mention they
won against the schooner, America. And this is bas ically one of the fastest schooners in the class in the
world, and they were able to beat them. So I salute
them.
As for the Honourable Ann Cartwright De
Couto, as was said earlier, she was a trailblazer. I put
her in the same category as Lois Browne- Evans and
Shirley Simmons. They were probably the first three
ladies to be registered in the Bar in Bermuda. And she
is up there with them. She was just as tenacious. She
was a craftsman when it comes to English language.
She was a first -class debater. And as was said about
the fish pot ban, she was tenacious, and she stood up
to everyone, because she believed in doing the right thing for the environment. And we have the results to
prove that.
As for her matrimonial practice, I have to
smile because the wives would go to Ann Cartwright. She would act on their behalf. And the guys would just
run the other way because they said, This woman is
coming, and she is coming like a pit bull. And they
were just like horrified that their spouse, or wife, would
get Ann Cartwright De Couto to represent them, because they knew that with her at the bat, they did not
stand a chance. So, to Jesse, to Douglas, you have
my sympathy. And your mother was a well -respected
community person. Thank you.

Thank you, Premier.
The Chair will now recognise the Minister for
Finance, Minister E. T. Richards.
PENSION TRUST FUNDS AMENDMENT ACT 2016
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Yes, Mr. Speaker.
I am introducing the following Bill for its first
reading so that it may be placed on the Order Paper for the next day of meeting: Pension Trust Funds Amendment Act 2016.

Thank you, Minister.
The Chair will now recognise the Minister for
Economic Development. Dr. the Honourable Grant Gibbons, I believe you have three.
LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ACT 2016
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
I am introducing the following Bill for its first
reading so that it may be placed on the Order Paper for the next day of meeting: Limited Liability Company
Act 2016.

Thank you, Minister.
And the third one?
BERMUDA INTERNATIONAL INTERESTS IN M OBILE EQUIPMENT (CAPE TOWN CONVENTION)
ACT 2016
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: And the third one,
Mr. Speaker, that I would like to introduce for its first reading so that it may be placed on the Order Paper for the next day of meeting is the Bermuda Interna-tional Interests in Mobile Equipment (Cape Town Convention) Act 2016. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

All right. Thank you, Dr. Gibbons.
The Chair will now recognise the Honourable
and Learned Attorney General. Attorney General T. G. Moniz, you have the floor.
MAINTENANCE ORDERS (RECIPROCAL E NFORCEMENT) AMENDMENT ACT 2016
Hon. Trevor G. Moniz: Thank you. Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
I am introducing the following Bill for its first
reading so that it may be placed on the Order Paper for the next day of meeting: Maintenance Orders (R eciprocal Enforcement) Amendment Act 2016.

The Chair will now recognise the Minister for Home Affairs. Minister Gordon- Pamplin, you
have the floor.
BERMUDA IMMIGRATION AND PROTECTION
AMENDMENT (ADOPTION) ACT 2016
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.

B ermuda House of Assembly Mr. Speaker, I am introducing the following
Bill for its first reading so that it may be placed on the
Order Paper for the next day of meeting: Bermuda Immigration and Protection Amendment (Adoption) Act 2016.

Thank you, Minister.
The Chair will now recognise the Minister for
Health and Seniors.
PUBLIC HEALTH AMENDMENT (NO. 2) ACT 2016
Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Mr. Speaker, I am intr oducing the following Bill for its first reading so that it may be placed on the Order Paper for the next day of
meeting: Public Health Amendment (No. 2) Act 2016.

Thank you, Minister.
The Chair will now recognise the Junior Mini ster for Tourism. K. L. Bascome, you have the floor.
HOTELS CONCESSION AMEN DMENT ACT 2016
Hon. Kenneth (Kenny) Bascome: Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
I am introducing the following Bill for its first
reading so that it may be placed on the Order Paper for the next day of sitting: Hotels Concession Amend-ment Act 2016.

The Chair will recognise the Honourable Minister of the Environment, Minister N. H. C. Simons.
Hon. N. H. Cole Simons: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I give notice that at the next day
of meeting, I propose to move the following motion:
That this Honourable House take note of and
approve the City of Hamilton Plan 2015.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Order No. 1 is carried over. Order No. 2
is carried over.
And we move to the Order No. 3, Consider ation of the Contributory Pensions (Amendment of Contributions and Benefits) Order 2016, in the name of the Minister of Finance. E. T. Richards, you have the floor.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I move that consideration be given to the draft
Order entitled the Contributory Pensions (Amendment of Contributions and Benefits) Order 2016, proposed to be made by the Minister of Finance under the pr ovision of section 37(1) of the Contributory Pensions Act 1970.

Any objections to that?
Carry on, please, Minister.
ORDER
CONTRIBUTORY PENSIONS (AMENDMENT OF
CONTRIBUTIONS AND BENEFITS) ORDER 2016
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to present the
Contributory Pensions (Amendment of Contributions
and Benefits) Order 2016 for consideration of this
Honourable House.
This is a clear indication of Government’s
commitment to enhance the quality of life of our senior citizens during these economic times. Honourable Members will recall that in the 2016/17 Budget, I a dvised that pension benefits under the Contributory Pension Fund [CPF] were last increased by 3 per cent
in August 2011, and that this was causing some diff iculties for some of our seniors, as other expenditures have been rising. I also announced that I would consider providing an increase in benefits after reviewing
the CPF 2014 Actuary Report.
Mr. Speaker, after carefully reviewing the
2014 Actuary Report, I propose to increase the Co ntributory Pension Fund benefits and contributions by 5 per cent and 7.5 per cent, respectively, effective
August 2016, when benefits under the plan are trad itionally amended.
Mr. Speaker, before I go into the specifics of
this Order, it may be useful to elaborate on the pen-sion arrangements currently in place in Bermuda. Bermuda, like most other countries, currently provides
retired individuals with a combination of social insurance from the Contributory Pension Fund and an occupational pension from their employer. In a perfect world, the social insurance should provide a first tier of basic pension, which would most likely be s upplemented by a second tier, or occupational pension.
2310 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly Through no fault of their own, currently a
number of retired persons are not receiving an occ upational pension and are therefore relying on their
social insurance as their sole source of income. Obv iously, Mr. Speaker, this is not an ideal situation, and
the Government continues to do its utmost to ensure
that seniors who rely heavily on their social insurance
benefits are cared for suitably.
Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding the aforementioned, the Contri butory Pension Fund benefits pr ovide an important base retirement income. Currently,
the maximum pension paid under the CPF is around 25 per cent of the median annual gross earnings for
Bermudians, as indicated in the Bermuda Job Market Employment Brief pr oduced by the Department of St atistics. This compares closely to the UK, where the full, basic state pension as a percentage of average earnings is around 24 per cent.
Mr. Speaker, the purpose of the Order is to
increase pensions and other benefits under the Con-tributory Pension Act 1970 by 5 per cent, and contr ibutions by 7.5 per cent, with effect from August of this
year. The Contributory Pension Fund, in principle, r elies on current contributors, or workers, paying [for]
current pensioners, and for the most part is a pay -asyou-go financed plan. However, the policy of increasing contribution rates by 2.5 per cent above the rate of
pension increases has allowed a significant level of
funds to build up. And thus, the plan is partially
funded, which provides further security of benefits.
Under section 37 of the
Contributory Pension
Act 1970, the Minister of Finance has the power to
make an Order to revi se the rates of contributions and
benefits of the Contributory Pension Fund.
Mr. Speaker, there are seven types of benefits
payable under the Contributory Pensions Act 1970. All
of the pensions and allowances will be increased by
5 per cent. These pensions and allowances are as
follows:
1. contributory old age pension;
2. contributory old age gratuity;
3. contributory widows or widowers’ allowance;
4. contributory widows or widowers’ gratuity;
5. contributory disability benefits;
6. non-contributory old age pension; and
7. non-contributory disability benefit.

Mr. Speaker, the basic contributory pension is
$982.98 per month. The maximum contribution pension currently payable, which includes additional i ncrements, is approximately $1,399.14 per month. A lthough some 12,365 persons currently receive benefits under the Act, the proposed 5 per cent increase
will raise the basic contributory pension to $1,029.30 per month, and the maximum benefit to about
$1,469.10 per month. Approximately 29.5 per cent of
the 12,365 seniors covered b y the Contributory Pe nsion Fund receive maximum pension benefits ranging from basic to the maximum. Honourable Members are advised that, based
on the Consumer Price Index, the cost of living has
increased by approximately 7.9 per cent since August
2011 when the last increase was granted. Although the benefit increase does not fully cover the prevailing rate of inflation, the Government is of the view that this increase should meet the important policy objectives to assist our seniors and strikes the right b alance
between fiscal and social responsibility.
Mr. Speaker, the 2016 Order now before the
House includes an increase in the rate of contributions
to the Contributory Pension Fund of 7.5 per cent. This
increase in the contribution rate is based on actuari al
advice and is intended to maintain the long- term v iability of the Contributory Pension Fund. The current
policy is to increase contributions by 2.5 per cent
more than any increase of benefits awarded. The 7.5 per cent increase represents a rise in contr ibutions
of $2.40 per week, payable by the employee, and an
increase of the same amount ($2.40) payable by the
employer. The employer would be responsible for submitting the total weekly contribution’s increase of
$4.80 and would have the authority to deduct $2.40
from each employee.
Mr. Speaker, as of 31
st of March of this year,
the fund has total assets of over $1.623 billion, repr esenting approximately 11.7 times the annual value of benefits paid in the Fiscal Year 2014/15. This is a relatively high leve l of funding, and when compared to
14 other regional social security schemes in a 2013
study, Bermuda’s ratio is better than nine of these
countries, the average of 7.5 years. By comparison,
the ratio of the Canada Pension Plan in 2013 was
4.98 years.
The effect, Mr. Speaker, is that if the CPF r eceived no further contributions it could still continue to
pay out pensions at the prevailing rate for some 12
years. However, the reality is that contributions will continue through time and will likely be increas ed from
time to time. In addition, the prudent investment of the pension fund assets is also an important factor in the
fund’s financial position.
Mr. Speaker, as evidenced by the 2014 act uarial report, the viability of the fund in the short - to
medium -term is good with the fund being positive for
the next 25 years. However, recognising the long- term
challenges of the fund, the Ministry will continue to closely monitor the performance of the fund. It should
also be noted that the funding policy for the fund is not
based on full actuarial funding, but based on sustai nable funding. That is, contributions plus investment income should cover benefits and administration expenses on an annual basis, while the fund builds up
sufficient reserves to cover several years of benefits
and expenses to withstand future adverse conditions.
Mr. Speaker, despite the encouraging short -to
medium -term outlook on the fund, what is clearly ev ident from the latest actuarial review is that Bermuda,
like most developed countries in th e world, is faced


Bermuda House of Assembly with challenges associated with the growth of an ag eing population. During the next 50 years, the number
of people over pension age of 65 is expected to i ncrease from 10,484 to 17,665, an increase of 7,181, or 68 per cent. This increase i n our seniors will obv iously place a greater strain on the country’s pension system. And it is essential that Government continue
to closely monitor the performance of the fund and our
overall pension arrangements to ensure pensions are
set at an appropriate level.
Honourable Members should note that in order to improve the projected financial position of the
fund in the long term the Ministry will carefully co nsider alternative scenarios included in the report. Fol-lowing this review the Ministry, in conjun ction with the
Pension and Benefits Working Group, will propose changes to the fund to ensure its sustainability in the long term.
Mr. Speaker, in closing, I wish to assure
Members, and more importantly current and future pensioners, that the Government is sensitive to the
challenges facing pension plans of this nature and will
endeavour to take the appropriate steps to enhance
the benefits paid from the scheme, as well as ensure
the fund has the ongoing ability to pay such benefits.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I know this is an Order and
not a Bill. I do not know if you want me to just go
through the clauses now, or after everyone has spo-ken?

You can go through that now, and then
the Members will get an opportunity to speak to the
entire Order.

Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
All right.
Well, clause 1 is self -explanatory.
Clause 2 amends the Contributory Pension
Act 1970, and the second and third Schedules of the
Act to reflect the new increases in benefits. The refer-ence to section 13(1) in the Schedule to the Order
relates to non- contributory old age pensions. The reference in section 17A relates to contributory disability benefits. The reference to section 17B relates to non-contributory disability benefits. And the reference to
the Second Schedule of the Act relates to the contributory old age pensions. And the reference to the
third Schedule of the Act relates to widows’ allo wances.
Clause 3 amends the first Schedule in the Act
to reflect the new increases in contributions.
And clause 4 sets the amendment date as
August 16
th, 2016, for benefits and August 1st, 2016,
for contributions. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That is what happens. So I see
you are wearing the red and blue very well.
Mr. Speaker, on this Bill . . . and I thank the
Minister for his brief. The last time that we did this,
actually, was July 8
th, 2011. I was not here. There are
a few Members who were here. But that was the last
time that pensions were increased for seniors. So we
are now going on five years [that] seniors have gone
without any increase, which is not something that, of
course, happened under the Progressive Labour Party
Government, where seniors received increases at least once every two years and, often, every year. So
that is the record, and people can compare the r ecords, Mr. Speaker.
But what the Minister said also is that he believes that this strikes the right balance. And I am not entirely certain that this does strike the right balance,
given the factors in our society, especially the factors
which affect seniors predominantly and the cost -ofliving increases that have been heaped upon them
from the One Bermuda Alliance, which I will get into later, Mr. Speaker.
What I would say is that, although the Minister
gave his brief, which is very similar to the brief that
was given in 2011, the challenge that I have is that the
circumstances, by and large, have changed. And
there are certain things that have changed. And when the Minister gave his statement on this we asked
some parliamentary questions. And one of the parliamentary questions I asked specifically was regarding
the review. Now, the Minister spoke about the review
that is going to be taking place. And I was wondering,
when the Minister gets a chance to respond, if he has any idea of the timelines for the recommendations that
will come from the Pensions and Benefits Working
2312 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly Group for any type of changes to the Contributory
Pension Fund.
On this side, Mr. Speaker, we have suggested
a number of things. The first thing, of course, that we
suggested is that we should change the contribution
structure for social insurance to make it more pr ogressive. And what does that mean, Mr. Speaker? It
means, like most other countries in the world that
have a social insurance scheme such as we have, the
contributions are not a fixed amount. Right now, no
matter if you make $10,000 a year or if you make $10 million a year, you pay the same amount of your money every week. That means that persons at the
bottom of the ladder are paying a higher percentage
of their income, and t hat means that persons at the
top are paying lower.
In many other countries, it is a scaled version;
it is a percentage of their income, especially, you know, when we look at the United States. We look at
other places, where it is a percentage of their income
that goes into the fund. So that is an idea that can make things more sustainable. And not only could it
make things more sustainable, it is fairer, it is more
equitable, and it can give relief to persons who are on
the lower end of the pay scale. So I think that that is
something that the Minister may want to consider. It is
something that we have stated numerous times during
our Budget replies and our Throne Speech replies. And it is something that I thought we might have an
opportunity to hear more about today, but we have
not.
Also, Mr. Speaker, we have heard about persons living longer. The question is, What are we going
to do about the retirement age? We have heard ques-tions about age discrimination. We have heard questions about people who want to work longer. What are
we going to do? We do know that if we raise the r etirement age, we raise the eligibility age for social i nsurance, we know that that means the fund will be
more sustainable. People want to work longer. We should give them the oppor tunity to do so. And if they
want to do so, then we should give them that opport unity, Mr. Speaker.
The final thing that I would like to ask, and I
know that we have had some parliamentary questions
about it, is, What is the Ministry of Finance doing in
regard to the enforcement of the outstanding contributions that exist in the social insurance scheme and the
Contributory Pension Fund? We understand that it is a
great number. We understand it is increasing. And we understand that there are some serial off enders. What
action is taking place? We have heard from the Gov-ernment that they are going to increase enforcement
action. There was nothing in the Minister’s statement
here. We see nothing insofar as legislation or drafted
legislation which has been tabled. We have seen very little progress in that regard.
And I think that persons would want to know,
especially individuals who had not had their social insurance paid by their employers and will then have
an issue getting their contributions when it is time.
Because the way the structure is set up, we have the
employer, of course, responsible for turning over
those contributions. And if those contributions are not turned over in the employee’s name, that means that
they do not get their benefit at the end of the day. So I
would like the Minister of Finance, hopefully when he
gets a chance to respond, to answer those questions,
because I think it is very important. And I think if the
Government has spoken about they are going to i ncrease enforcement, I think that the persons who . . .
we here in Parliament and the general public should
understand what enforcement actions they are taking.
What enforcement actions may actually be coming?
And what may be done, especially for those persons
who are incredible serial offenders insofar as turning
over their pensions to the Contributory Pension Fund, Mr. Speaker?
Now, Mr. Speaker, what many said when the
announcement came by the Minister of Finance that
they were going to be increasing pensions by 5 per
cent is that they said, Oh, boy. Looks like an election
is coming. Because the same Minister who said that
money does not grow on trees has managed to give a
pittance to seniors, Mr. Speaker. And why do I say it
was pittance? Because the Honourable Minister of Finance hims elf admitted that this increase does not
even keep up with the rate of inflation. So we are gi ving seniors an increase that does not keep up with the
rate of inflation at the same point in time that the One
Bermuda Alliance has increased the cost of living for
seniors.
What does that mean, Mr. Speaker? Our seniors are worse off. That is what it means. Seniors in
this country are worse off under the One Bermuda
Alliance than they were under the Progressive Labour
Party. That is a fact that is without disput e, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the 5 per cent increase that has
happened that we are going to see today does not
match the inflation rate over the same period in time,
which has been 8.3 per cent. The Minister admitted
that it is under that rate, so we under stand that. So
our seniors have fallen behind. But I spoke about the increase of the cost for seniors. And let me just touch
on that, Mr. Speaker, because I think it is very important. The same Minister of Finance who is saying that
he is striking the righ t balance in making sure that we
are socially responsible re- introduced fees for seniors
to pay for their cars. The same Minister of Finance who said we are striking the right balance attempted
to raise land tax on seniors. The same Minister of F inance inc reased their costs at the hospital by reducing the subsidy. The same Minister of Finance i ncreased the cost of the health insurance programme. And the same Minister of Finance increased the cost
of FutureCare.


Bermuda House of Assembly All of these costs affect our seniors, Mr.
Speaker. However, there are no increases that are in
relation to that. And it should also be stated, because
for civil servants who get money from the Public Service Superannuation Fund, we should also note that their automatic increases have been stopped as well.
So this means that those persons are also worse off.
Now, Mr. Speaker, less money in their poc kets and an increase in their costs. But the Minister of
Finance says that we are striking the right balance.
No, Mr. Speaker, this is not the right balance, and it is a mere pittance. Because one of the things that we commonly hear in this House whenever we speak on
issues of economics is the refrain from the One Bermuda Alliance saying, 14 years, 14 years! You had 14
years! What did you do? Well, I will cha llenge any
Member to get up and criticise what we are saying between 14 years. Because, Mr. Speaker, here is what I will say. We increased contributions at least
once every two years under the Progressive Labour
Party. Our pension increases were above the rate of inflation, Mr. Speaker. That means that seniors did not
fall behind, unlike what has happened under the One
Bermuda Alliance. And, as the Minister of Finance will
readily admit, the Contributory Pension Fund was left
in a strong state.
Those are the facts, Mr. Speaker. That is what
we have. So the Minister of Finance must answer to the people of this country, especially the seniors of
this country, some of whom have seen their (and I will
get to this a little later) take- home, the amount that
they a re getting from social insurance, almost disappear because of these additional increases such as
FutureCare and HIP [Health Insurance Plan]. Som etimes, persons on social insurance get $40 because
they automatically take out FutureCare and they
automaticall y take out health insurance programme.
And when those increases happen, which the One
Bermuda Alliance has put on them, they get a mere
pittance, Mr. Speaker. Sometimes, it is nothing.
So, here is the thing. The record between the
two parties is clear, Mr. Speaker. On that side, the
One Bermuda Alliance, when it comes to pensions for seniors, they do not believe in increasing the seniors’ pensions to keep up with the rate of inflation. And they
say that although it does not make it, it strikes the
right bal ance. On this side, we believe that we should.
However, Mr. Speaker, let us go on. Because during
the One Bermuda Alliance election campaign, one of
the things that they said was that they would reduce health care costs. We heard that over and over again.
We’ll reduce health care costs. We’ll get a grip on
health care costs. We’ll get a grip on the hospitals.
We’ll get a grip on health care costs all around.
Well, here is the kicker, Mr. Speaker. Since
2012, health care costs have increased more than
20 per cent since 2012. And since the last pension
increase that happened in August of 2011, health care costs have gone up more than 30 per cent, Mr. Speaker. We have to understand that health care
costs, of course, affect seniors more than they affect
the general populace. And that was clearly given on
July 8
th, 2011, by the Honourable Minister of Finance,
who was then the Shadow Minister of Finance, who
said the following —and if you will allow me to read
from the Hansard, Mr. Speaker.
This is on 1July 8th, 2011. He had some questions for the Minister of Finance. And [the then -
Shadow Finance Minister] said:
“The first one that came to mind from the pensioner’s standpoint is that, is 3 per cent enough? Is it
adequate in view of the rise in cost of living, not t he
general rise in the cost of living, but the rise in the cost of living for seniors?”
He went on to say, “But it is a significant i ssue, in that, you know, we are using this 3 per cent. It
is higher than the average inflation rate of Bermuda. Average inflation rate is not as high as 3 per cent. But
one has to recognise that the increase in living costs for older people, the costs are different because health care is a much higher proportion of your costs
as you get older. You know, the machine starts to
break down.”
The Minister of Finance then went on to say,
“We all know that the average rate of increase of
costs for things having to do with health is much
greater than the average rate of inflation. So that is
one question that comes to mind: Is it suf ficient? Is it
adequate? Or, you know, is it not enough, and seniors
are still, in spite of this, going to suffer some reduction
in their net disposable income?”
Mr. Speaker, that was five years ago. The
Minister of Finance now has the power to make sure that he rights a perceived wrong that he saw in 2011.
But five years later, here we have the same Minister
of Finance, or the person who was Shadow Minister of Finance then, now getting up and saying that we are
striking the right balance by increasing pensions less
than the rate of inflation.
When we talk about health insurance costs,
Mr. Speaker, it is very important to note also, since
the last time pensions were increased, and this i ncrease is only going to be 5 per cent —the last time
pensions were inc reased, HIP costs were up 13 per
cent, and FutureCare costs are up 34 per cent, Mr.
Speaker. However, seniors are only going to get 5 per
cent. Yet, they are going to have to pay and absorb these additional costs, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I have compared the records of
our two parties, and I think that the record is clear. When it comes to the issues of making sure that at a
very basic level we can make sure that we provide for
our seniors, that we can make their living years as
comfortable as possible, w e on this side demonstrated
during our time in office that it was something that was
a priority for us. Mr. Speaker, I do not believe that it is

1 Official Hansard Report, 8 July 2011, page 2184
2314 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly a priority for the One Bermuda Alliance. And it is very
clear, Mr. Speaker, because after four years the pe ople of this country can see what the record of the One
Bermuda Alliance in regard to seniors is. It is a record
in which they take money away and reduce grants to seniors’ care homes. It is a record in which they make seniors pay more at the hospital. It is a record in
which they make seniors pay more for FutureCare and HIP. It is a record in which they make seniors pay
more for their cars. It is a record in which they make
seniors pay more for just about everything that they can, Mr. Speaker —complete disregar d.
But I get back to where I started, Mr. Speaker.
Some people may say that an election is coming. The
last two United Bermuda Party pension increases, Mr.
Speaker, took place in 1993 and 1998. It seems that
they have this thing for going every five years . Mr.
Speaker, I think we all know what took place in 1993 and 1998. Five years ago when the Minister of F inance, the current Minister of Finance, questioned the delay in contributions for one year, he said the follo wing, and I quote:
2“Yet, we are seeing a delay of a
year in increasing contributions.
“So I wondered if this delay was a delay rel ative to economics, or whether this was a delay relative to politics. So, that is a question that I think is certainly
worth asking.”
Mr. Speaker, I will rephrase the Finance Mi nister’s statement of five years ago. And I will say,
Many will wonder whether or not this increase is rel ative to economics or relative to politics. Given the behaviour of the One Bermuda Alliance in many ways
mimics their forebears of the U nited Bermuda Party, I
would advise members of the public to make sure that their voter registration details are up to date, as it is
clear that an election is sooner rather than later, Mr.
Speaker. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Honourable Member.
The Chair will now recognise the Minister for
Economic Development. Dr. Grant Gibbons, you have
the floor.

Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I have certainly listened intently
to that very impassioned speech. A nd, as usual, the
Honourable Member has only told half the story. It is
always easy to give away money when it is somebody else’s. And I think Honourable Members on both sides
of the House know the Contributory Pension scheme
is not Government money which is being given away.
These are known as pay-as-you-go schemes. And
what that means, Mr. Speaker, is the money that is
going out in the form of benefits is coming in directly in
the form of contributions. So those who are working

2 Ibid. right now and paying their social insurance, and that
includes both employees and employers, are the ones essentially who are providing the money for the benefits.
So when my honourable colleague, Mr. Ric hards, says that it is the right balance, that is exactly
what he means. He has a responsibility to make sure
there is an appropriate balance between the contributions which are being made now and the benefits
which are going to seniors. I do not think anybody in
this House would say that seniors do not deserve a pension and a strong pension and increases as ap-propriate. But, as Honourable Members will only know
too well on that side of the House, we have had a pretty tough time over the last five years, and a lot of
the consequences of that were in place because of
policies put in p lace by the former Government.
So, I think it is quite appropriate for those who
are in the workforce right now, both employers and
employees, that there was a delay between the time
that yet another increase was placed on those who are currently working, because as you know, there
clearly were issues in relation to employment, unem-ployment and also the size of paycheques over the
last five, six, seven years. So it is that balance which I
am sure the Honourable Minister refers to in terms of
trying to stri ke a balance between what is fair to those
who are currently in the workforce, who are paying
their social insurance, and those who benefit by this
particular increase by the benefit which is done now.
I think it is also fair to say that there is a r esponsibility as well, not only to seniors who are col-lecting their benefits at the present time under the s ocial insurance, but also those seniors down the road,
those who are currently working but will retire in three
years, five years, ten years. So that is also part of the
balance, which is very important here. Sustainability is a critical issue here, one of the reasons why there is a
2.5 per cent premium between what is collected in
terms of contributions at 7.5 per cent versus what is
being paid out in benefits.
There is also nothing to prevent the Minister
of Finance from looking at this again next year. But I
think, as we know, 5 per cent is quite a significant i ncrease. The last increase that was of that nature was
by, not the former Government, but the Government
before that, which was 9 per cent. I think there were a
couple of increases way back —

The Honourab le Minister of F inance is misleading the House—sorry, the HonourBermuda House of Assembly able former Minister of Finance, but the Honourable
Minister of Economic Development is misleading the
House. He said that there was a 9 per cent increase
by not the former Government, but by the United
Bermuda Party Government. There was a 9 per cent
increase in 2004 by the Progressive Labour Party Government. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Then we have had
some significant increases over the years. And usually
those are catch -up, Mr. Speaker.

[Inaudible interjection]
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: They are. I mean,
the Honourable Member laughs. These are catch- up
situations because it is recognised there is a need to
provide additional support to seniors.
The differ ence between 2004 and 2016 is
pretty dramatic in terms of the nature of the economy in those two periods. And I think in 2004 there was not quite the same pressure, because we were in the
midst of, in some respects, kind of a perverse benefit,
Katrina, Wil ma and other hurricanes that produced a
huge inflow of capital in this country. Things were booming at that particular time.

Minister, carry on.
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Yes, the Honourable
Member is quit e correct. Katrina was 2005. But before
that—I was going to get there— we had 9/11. There
was a significant increase in the type of business that
was being done here, which resulted in very nice
revenues coming in to Government. But that was sustained over a period of a couple of years. It is perverse, in a way, that we benefit by disasters som ewhere else, but that is exactly what happened with the economy at that particular time.
So the point I am making is that putting
through an increase, a burden on employees going back a couple of years, would have been probably not
the right balance. There would have been a lot of
complaints that that would produce hardship and the
rest of it. So the Honourable Member has waited until he felt . . . And we have had five , I believe, quarters of
positive economic growth so far. So it is an appropr iate time, a better balance right now to be able to start to put this through. And as the economy improves still
further, (and I cannot speak for the Minister) I am sure
he will l ook at this next year, as well.
So it is important for people to understand the
other side of the story as to where the money is com-ing from and the burden that puts on people who are
working at the present time.
I think the Honourable Member, in fairness ,
raised some good points. I think this issue of looking at the retirement age is something that probably the
former Government looked at as well. I am sure the Minister of Finance will look at it in this particular case.
Some Honourable Members may be aware that the
way it works in the United States, with the Social S ecurity benefits, is that you can elect as to when you
start to, essentially, take your benefits. So, if you want
to, if you retired early, you can start actually to get your benefits earlier as opposed to later, or you can defer those benefits to a slightly later point. What that
means in practice is, if you take it earlier, you get a
reduced benefit because you are likely to take those
benefits over a longer period of time. If you wait, let us
say, until you are not 65, but 66, 67, the benefit act ually increases because you may be working in that
period still at age 65.
So that is something that may be of interest to
look at here. And obviously, that depends, Mr.
Speaker, to a large degree on actuarial life tables as
to how long, in this particular case, Bermudians are likely to live. Because that is what gets looked at in
terms of the sustainability and the durability of the
fund to be able to pay out. How long are people li ving? How long is t he Contributory Pension Fund likely
to have to pay these out? And as Bermudians live longer and age, I will just say, more gracefully, then
obviously the payments have to go over a longer period of time.
One of the other challenges that we have got
as well , and this is a consequence also of some of the
loss of jobs that we have seen in the last seven years,
is there is a much smaller —

Okay. All right.

Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Okay. So the point I
was going to make is that we have a smaller base
now in terms of the numbers out there that are contributing towards this, as well. And tha t is another i ssue that the Honourable Member, the Minister of F inance, has to bring into place.
As far as health costs are concerned, I will
end on this note. Mr. Speaker, you will recall one of
the things that the former Opposition used to talk
2316 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report
B ermuda House of As sembly about al l the time, which was the dramatic increase in
the premium, the standard premium under the former
Government. So I would just like to say that the Ho nourable Member has drawn attention to increases r ecently. Those have slowed down. My honourable co lleague, the Minister of Health, I am sure will speak to
this issue. But there was a very dramatic increase in
the cost of HIP insurance during the former Gover nment’s time, as well. And as a consequent, I think we
know all about the Acute Care Wing and the costs involved there.
So all of this adds up in terms of the health
care costs in other areas. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Take your time.
[Inaudible interjection] `
Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes, yes, it was a
great lunch.
[
Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: No, I am still that 160.
Mr. Speaker, on this pension issue, and I
heard the Honourable Minister Grant Gibbons say it is
easy to giv e away money when it is somebody else’s.
Very true . Very true. And I think the Minister Richards
said an increase in our seniors’ population puts a
strain on the fund. Yes, it does, Mr. Speaker.
And we do know —I do know , I think we all
know —that the socia l insurance cheque was not put
there to take care of your all your needs , because it is
not sufficient.
But Mr. Speaker, how did we get in this situation? This situation stems years back before any one of us here, during our time, before our time . . . how
we got in this position, Mr. Speaker, is because as
you probably know, the pensions for the majority of Bermudians, particularly black Bermudians, is som ething just recent.
And, Mr. Speaker, when you look at the i ncome disparity of blacks versus whites, blacks did not
have the disposable income to save, to put some money somewhere else in another fund or invest in another fund so that they would have not only the s ocial insurance cheque, but monies from other inves tments. They did not have that, Mr. Speaker.
And, Mr. Speaker, if you look at the cost of
living today as compared to, let us say 1974. I n 1974
if you took an employee from Public Works at that time, 20 per cent of their income was for the rent. T oday it is 41 per cent , and the wages have not g one up
in that particular ratio, Mr. Speaker.
So, Mr. Speaker, with the expenses that we
face today being more than [we have] ever faced,
people would say (and I would say also) that they
think Government is finding money for other things but
not enough for our seniors. But let me first say, before I lose my train of [thought] , we want to thank the Go vernment on behalf of seniors for the 5 per cent i ncrease. Even though it does not fall in line with COLA (cost -of-living adjustment) , gifts are always needed
and [we are] thankful.
So, Mr
. Speaker, when we look at the costs ,
what we have put on our seniors today, the present Government increased costs to seniors , hospital care ,
by 10 per cent at the hospital.
Mr. Speaker, I think that at one time seniors
were able to get a passport for nothing. It costs today.


Bermuda House of Assembly In fact, I think [it now] costs like $160 for a passport. I
think I can remember, I believe it was in 1998, it cost
about $40- something, I believe—quite a jump, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, when we see gr ants that are
given to rest homes, they have been cut. This is not
the first year, it has happened before.
Mr. Speaker, and when we look at the pro blems that seniors are having today, many years ago
when you were a little boy , I remember , Mr. Speaker,
when we saw somebody acting strangely, in particular
an older person, we said they were crazy. That is what we used [to say] in those days, right? Not knowing that, as we have learned today, they had dementia. So a lot of people that we said, Oh, something’s
wrong with them, we did not know any better then. But
today you have got the Alzheimer’s and the dementia,
and Government has not, up to this point, put any programmes in place to assist families with dementia
care. And it seems to be very rampant today because
health . . . the cost for dementia in the UK is extrav agant. It is very high, very high in the UK. And Bermuda
is no exception.
So, we need facilities for our seniors, Mr.
Speaker. And for the Government to say that we are going to leave it to the private sector, well, the private
sector can . . . I think they should be a part of it, but as
a Government we have a responsibility to take care of
our seniors. And this Government and the last Government are sending . . . are forcing retirement . . .
firing seniors. Once they go 65, they are sending them
home. So that population, those who are not working,
has increased, a lot of it because of forced retirement, Mr. Speaker. And, yes, as the Minister of Finance says,
there is a strain on the fund. Well , that is not new to
Bermuda, and it is not new to other parts of the world.
In fact, other parts of the world are taking steps to correct it. In fact, some of them have done it where the
ultimate goal is to get the retirement age up to 70. And
we have not done anything, and I think the Gover nment here has not not put it in place, the policy in
place, because they want to get rid of some more
people.

Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: Point of order, Mr.
Speaker.

All right. Thank you.
Thank you. I think that is correct, MP Burgess.
Hon. Derrick V. Burgess , Sr.: Mr. Speaker, I am not
even talking about the voluntary [retirement], which is
completely different. I understand that. People that want to go, they are offered early retirement, and I
think that those people that can afford it do that. That
is fine. I am talking about those at 65. I did say those
that are 65, those are the ones that Government are
forcing to retire. And you know we are sending a lot of
people home—

Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Point of order, Mr.
Speaker.

Right, y es. Yes, right, it is . . . I guess it
is the employment agreement that . . .
Carry on, carry on.

Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes.
Mr. Speaker, you know when they put the you
retire at 65 rule in place, it was probably in the 1950s ,
and at that time lif e expectancy was about 63. Well,
there are a lot of years between 1950 and 2016. Today p eople at 80 are considered young. And what
countries are doing is increasing the retirement age—
raising the retirement age to 70. They are trying to get
it up to 70 in order to have less strain on the fund. A
person [that was] 65 thirty years ago was considered
old. A person [that is] 65 today is not considered old,
Mr. Speaker.
2318 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly You do not look old, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Honourable Member. Flattery will g et you nowhere, though.

[Laughter]

Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Even the Leader of the
country is near 65. He does not look it. So we will not
send him home early.

Hon. Michael H. Dunkley: I am not 60 yet.

[Laughter and inaudible interjection]

Hon. D errick V. Burgess, Sr.: I was trying to help
you out . I am here trying to help you out.
[Inaudible interjections ]
Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes, I am trying to get
you there quick.
[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yeah. And th e other
thing, Mr. Speaker —
[Inaudible interjection]

Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Oh, well, that is true . I
do not look 50, that is true.

[Inaudible interjection]

Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: Yes, they . . . I do.
When I go downtown people say , What! Are you
home from college?
I say, N o, no.

[Laughter]

Hon. Derrick V. Burgess, Sr.: I am so, you know . . .
that is what they tell me. I do not know . I do not know
what they are trying to tell me, but anyhow, it feels so
good when they tell me that, yo u know.
But, Mr. Speaker, what is happening is we are
giving tax exemptions (and when I say “we” I am tal king about this Government and the former Gover nment ) to employers who have not paid up on their
contributions and payroll tax to the Government. You know, those tax exemptions came into place when we
were the Government and we put no criteria on it. So
these people are getting away . . . a lot of people have
gotten away over the years .
I remember one fellow telling me about . . . it
could have been ei ght, nine years ago, and he worked
steady up until the age of about 70. And he went to
get a pension, even though he was late going to get it . But he went to get a pension and there was no money
there for him, even though the employer was deduc ting for the pension from his wage every week .
That is one story and there are many stories
like that.
Now, I feel that the rules that are in place are
not strong enough where the employer should be r equired, on a monthly basis or a three- month basis,
that they inform the employee with proof that they
have paid their pension, health insurance, payroll deductions. That is what should happen, Mr. Speaker, because you are working and you think everything is
going fine when it is not going fine because these
folks are not paying for your deductions.
Mr. Speaker, today’s wages . . . even though
it is a 5 per cent increase, today’s wages buy , in the
United States , 30 per cent less than they could in
1968. So I make an appeal to the Government to pay
some money to our employees, some more money to
employees, because of the history. For a lot of these
folks, as you all know by now, this is the only income
they have because of our history. [They had] no di sposable income to save or invest to have those little
dividends here an d there coming in to help out. They
do not have any of that. And that is why we definitely
should be taking care of our seniors.
And, Mr. Speaker, just the history of this country when we used to bring in—and still do —employees
from overseas to undercut t he wages of Bermudians.
That is one of the side effects of the problems we are
having today because that was done. They not only undercut you, but you get no benefits. Our benefits
are brand new to Bermudians, particularly black Ber-mudians, and so they cer tainly would be in a worse
position than others in the country because of the hi story and because of the wages that they were paid
during those times, Mr. Speaker.
So, Mr. Speaker, I would ask . . . I think it was
Minister Grant Gibbons who said the 9 per cent i ncrease that we got was a catch- up. Yes, it was a
catch -up, but Mr. Speaker, we will never catch up because this thing started way back in the 1800s. We
will never catch up. But we can do a better job than
we are doing. I would hope that this Commit tee, even
though I have some problems with the Committee you
just appointed, Mr. Speaker —no criticism to you at
all—trying to get a decent wage, that would hopefully
bring it current to what it should be for somebody to be able to live. But we need to brin g the benefits in
line where they should be like everyone else that is
receiving benefits from other places via dividends and the likes of that because we did not have the disposable income. We still do not have the disposable i ncome to invest like most ot hers do. And you can just
look at the disparity between blacks and whites in
Bermuda and you see the difference and the reason
why.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.



Bermuda House of Assembly The Speaker: Thank you . Thank you, Honourable
Member.
The Chair will now recognise the Honourable
Member from constituency 29, MP Zane De Silva.
You have the floor.

Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am happy to weigh in on this
change that the Minister has brought about today. And
something that the Honourable Member Derrick Bu rgess just said is very important, Mr. Speaker, because
you know when he talks about catching up and you never will because as we all know, 90 per cent of the
world’s wealth is controlled by 10 per cent of the pe ople . . .and that is not going to change. It certainly will
not change in my lifetime, Mr. Speaker, and will not change in my grandchildren’s lifetimes either.
But he brought up a good point and it is true.
There are many seniors in this country that were able,
just by the colour of thei r skin, to have an advantage
that some of our black people today are recipients of
just because of the colour of their skin. And you know,
unfortunately, that is where we are. But there may be .
. . someday , we might see a catching up in that cat egory and it would be nice to see, I am sure.
My colleague, Rolfe Commissiong, does talk
about that quite often and I agree with him. A lot of our
racial problems , maybe we would not experience
them today if the wealth gap was a little closer.
But, Mr. Speaker, getting onto this increase is
overdue and it is fantastic for our seniors. But it does fall woefully short, Mr. Speaker . It falls woefully short.
The Minister said that he is trying to strike the right balance, and even his colleague , Dr. Gibbons , echoed
that sentiment about striking the right balance. And I
am not sure, it was one of our colleagues on this side
that talked about the . . . when you talk about the right
balance, you know, and you think about the amount
that is taken from everyone, whether that person is
Mrs. Smith —

[Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, Deputy Speaker,
in the Chair]

Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: —Madam Deputy Speaker,
whether it is Mrs. Smith who works behind the cash register , or whether it is the CEO that is making a mi llion dollars a year —the deduction is the same. And,
you know , I think it is high time that . . . whether it be
this Government or the future Government, I think that that is something that should be looked at and looked
at seriously.
I am sure, Madam Deputy Speaker, that, you
know, those that are making three, four, five hundred thousand a year, those that are making several million
dollars a year, certainly would not mind paying a little
bit more than what they are paying. And I would submit to you, Madam Deputy Speaker, that . . . why
should we not have price breaks with regard to contr i-butions? So , if Mrs. Smith is making $40,000 a year ,
she pays maybe 5 per cent of that amount , which currently is deducted , while Mr. Tucker , who is making
several million a year , should be making up that def icit. And , quite frankly , I think if it is done correctly ,
maybe the Finance Minister might find that he would
have a little more money than what he currently co llects, certainly , if he does the numbers correctly , and I
think that the civil servants that work in the Finance
Ministry could come up with that formula fairly rapidly.
So, I think that that is something that we should look
into because we do not want to mention the “I” word —
income tax —do we? No, we do not want to mention
that.
But I think this is certainly a way in which, you
know, folks can contribute. It is not going to hurt them, especially the ones that are making a lot of money . It
is not going to hurt them and they can contribute to
assisting our seniors who, as we know, Madam Deputy Speaker, a lot of our seniors are hurting, and I will
get into that in a minute.
But one thing that always resonates with me
when it comes to our seniors and the current Finance Minister , is when he made the statement to our seniors so metime last year, and he will [remember] , is
when he told them money doesn’t grow on trees .

[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: That was the year before,
was it?
[Inaudible interjection]

Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: The year before, last y ear,
two years, three years ago he told our seniors that
money does not grow on trees, which I thought then,
and I will continue to think now, that that was offensive. It was offensive.
But I am glad to see that the Minister is now
finding at least a few trees that have some money on
them.

A few leaves.
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Yes, a few leaves, as my
colleague, Walter Roban, says.
In fact, you know, when I think about it,
Madam Deputy Speaker, you think about the increase
in our FutureCare premiums (and a couple of col-leagues have spoken about it on this side) . Now that
some of our seniors are paying more, more fees for
the licence on their cars that they did not previously
pay for, the land tax, some of our land tax benefits
have been taken away; we have a reduced subsidy at
the hospital, which is huge; and you will know that the
OBA opened up the clinic on Victoria Street , you
know , whilst we were in Government we got rid of the
indigent clinic, that horrible place down at the hospital .
2320 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly Now you have got seniors that are foregoing going
around to the clinic because now it has got the same
sort of stigma attached to it that the former indigent
clinic used to have. And so our seniors do not want to
go there because they say if they go there they are highlighted [and told] to go and get assistance.
I do not know why, for the life of me, that the
OBA Government changed that. I mean, our seniors
were able to go to the doctor of their choice —with
dignity . Yes, they could hold their head up high, walk
in the office, sit next to you and me, Madam Deputy Speaker, and you would not know their financial situa-tion. Why did we take that away?
Madam Deputy Speaker, the lack of jobs that
were promised by the OBA has caused our seniors
forever , financial challenges. And you know I have
said it before, Madam Deputy Speaker . Why do I say
that? Well, because a lot of our young people are being subsidised by their grandmothers and parents. I
have seen more middleclass people struggle over the
last seve ral years, and I am sure everyone in this
House has, than at any time in our history. People are
hurting badly and when folks are not working, who do
they run to? Well, they run to mama and they run to
grandma. So they have been feeling that pinch of the lack of jobs for our people because they subsidise
their children. They look after their children and their
grandchildren. Of course they do!
We took away things like free education at the
college. So what happens is, again, this falls on our
seniors —our mothers, fathers, and our grandparents—all of these things, Madam Deputy Speaker.
And you had that comment , money doesn’t grow on
trees . But we find money . . . money does not grow on
trees, but we find money . . . and I believe the Ho nourable Member , Diallo Rabain, said (I believe it was
him and you can correct me if I am wrong) that this
new office renovation for Minister Fahy is going to
cost a couple of hundred thousand dollars (the Member who sits in another place) . For one of our Mini sters, it is goin g to cost a couple of hundred thousand
dollars, but we tell our seniors , money doesn’t grow
on trees.
We have money that we find for a Commi ssion of Inquiry, which to me—another $400,000—which to me, I think, is a witch- hunt.
We find $500,000 , a million , maybe two mi llion dollars to do an investigation on former Premier Brown and my doctor , Dr. Reddy. We find money for
that, but we struggle to find money for our seniors.
We can find half a million dollars in bonuses
for the Bermuda Tourism Authority staff, the Executive
in particular —the Executive in particular , who received
over $500,000 in bonuses —another half a million do llars gone.
And while we are on half a million dollars,
what about another half a million dollars since the i nception being paid to board members on the Bermuda
Tourism Authority?
[Hon. K. H. Randolph Horton, Speaker, in the Chair]

Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Mr. Speaker, we just had a
referendum. That cost . . . I guess it was $380,000 –
400,000. Lord knows what expenses were attached to
that that we are not going to find out about, but that
was another $400,000.
So, these things quickly run up, Mr. Speaker,
tally up to about two and half, three million dollars.
Could our seniors have used that money? Of course they could have. But it seems like the OBA Gover nment can find money for witch- hunts , for all these
other things , referendums . . . all these other things
they can find money for, but they took four years , almost , to find money for our seniors.
So, Mr. Speaker, you see, this is what I stru ggle with , all the money that is found for other things.
And you have people, organisations like Agape House
. . . I had the luxury of attending the prize- giving last
night and I know they are struggling. Y ou have Project
Action, who as reported in the paper, I think this week ,
they are struggling, and they look after our seniors.
I mean, we seem to find money for all these
other things, but we do not seem to find the correct
amount of money for our seniors.
Mr. Speaker, I am hopeful that since the F inance Minister and the Minister , Dr. Gibbons , spoke
about this at great length, I am hoping that with all the
projections that they are predicting in terms of Bermuda’s success and the hotel development, America’s Cup . . . I am hoping that they might even break
tradition, Mr. Speaker, and come back here ( if they
are in Government long enough) to this House very
soon with an increase, Mr. Speaker. Because I certainly think that if the OBA can find money for all those
things that I just listed, surely t hey can find a little bit
more money for our seniors.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, the interes ting thing about being in politics is that the worst thing
you can be accused of is playing politics. Basketball
players do not get accused of playing basketball and it
is a bad thing. Tennis players do not get accused of
playing tennis and it is a bad thing. But politicians,
when they play politics, it is considered a bad thing. And we know that this increase comes at a pretty o pportune time. And a spin doctor would say that, you
know, in the last hour we have recognised that our
seniors have been hard done by and can beat their
chest s and say they have gotten their first increase in
five years.
Mr. Speaker, I am reminded of the philos opher and writer , Theodor Geisel , who wrote of a character who the spirit of the season caused her heart to
grow three sizes bigger. To those who are not aware,
Theodor Geisel is the real name of Dr. Seuss, and he
was speaking of the Grinch in [How] the Grinch who
stole Christmas , which was inspired by the Christmas
season. But I see no inspiration of any season —not
Cup Match season, not Christmas season—within this
Government . I see the inspiration and the awakening
of election season.
And make no mistake, when you have been
the Grinch who has taken away benefits for seniors, when you have been the Gri nch that has cut pr ogrammes that benefit seniors, when you have been the Grinch that tells our seniors that money does not
grow on trees , and you look at the largest voting bloc
in our country, it is evident that the spirit of some season has caused the he art of the Government to grow
three sizes bigger.
But as we look at the record, Mr. Speaker,
they will tell you that they inherited a mess, that , you
know this was the best we could do. Mr. Speaker,
firem en inherit a mess every time they go to work, but
they do not pour gasoline on the fire. And what we
have seen is an exacerbation of the condition of our
seniors in this country under the One Bermuda All iance. It is clear. Their quality of life is not better. Their
standard of living is not better. Their ability to pay their
bills and meet their responsibilities is not better.
And so we have to ask ourselves . . . I think
we accept that these increases are necessary . I think
we have been calling for them more regularly . We accept that our seniors will benef it from this in some
small measure, but we have to look deeper into what it means to take care of our seniors in this country. What is our vision for ensuring a quality of life for
those who have built this country and who have
helped to make it the strong foundation that we all
benefit from as younger people? That is the question. And I think that when I look at some of what my col-leagues have laid out in terms of reform, a fairer tax
structure, ways to address some of the inequities, we
have to do better by our seniors. We have to do better
by our seniors and we have to do better when it is not
just election season.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank you, Honourable Member.
Any other Honourable Members care to
speak?
Then the Chair will recogn ise the Minister for
Health and Seniors, Jeanne Atherden.
You have the floor.

Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Mr. Speaker, although we
have been talking about the Contributory Pensions, it
seems to me that a lot of focus has been put on our
seniors, recognising that they , obviously, are the persons who benefit from the increases in the Contrib utory Pension.
I must say, Mr. Speaker, there was a suggestion at the beginning that this increase was just be-cause an election should be coming up, and a suggestion to individuals to get their voter registration in
order and up to date. But all I can say to you, Mr.
Speaker, as I said many times, you know, we have
every opportunity to stay at the wicket for the five
years and, therefore, do not start rushing out there
and thinking that we are running scared.
Mr. Speaker, if you think about it, and I have
mentioned this before and I have mentioned this to
the seniors when I am out talking to them, when I am
reminded of their concerns I do say to them that I am
talking to th e Finance Minister . And the Finance Mini ster is assuring me that once he has the actuarial r eview he will be able to turn around and make the dec ision about the sustainability of the fund and be able to turn around and make an appropriate increase. And
he has done that. And, as I say, he has been saying
this from much earlier in the year and, therefore, I do
not want people to turn and add some extra motive to
this. The actuarial review enables us to understand
and the Minister to understand how sustainable it is.
And whether we like it or not we have to start understanding the social insurance contribution, the benefit
that the seniors get , we have to understand how it got
there and why it is the way it is.
The Honourable Derrick Burgess mentioned
the fact and the appreciation that it is a combination of
the social insurance and what we would call the occ upational pension. And yes, rather unfortunately, ev erybody did not work for, and everybody did not have
occupational pensions that were afforded them by their companies. But at least the Government, over
2322 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly time, has been able to try and move the social insurance forward to try and come up with a rate that is
more appropriate to the circumstances.
I think it is significant for us to understand that
the Contrib utory Pension benefit pays out a pension
which is 25 per cent of the median annual gross ear nings for Bermudians. And when you compare that to
other places, which are 24 per cent, at least it indicates to us that it is at a level that would be deemed to
be normal when you compare it to other jurisdictions.
But that does not mean that as we go forward we are
not mindful of the fact that there are a lot of Bermudi-ans who are out there relying on the pension fund,
relying on the social insurance benefits they get as a
way for them to be able to live and, if they do not have
any other supplemental income, then it is putting a
strain. And so that is why over time we have actually started to try and look at what money an individual has and how we can turn and reduce some of the
strain of some of the other expenses that they have to
cover out of that.
A lot of reference has been made to the
health premiums. And for a moment I am just going to remind us here in the House and the listening aud ience of some of the things that have affected us with
respect to the health premiums. And I am not just going to talk about the fact that health premiums bear a
relationship to the loss ratios, which are the claims that we are paying out all the time versus the prem iums that have been taken in, but I also think that lots
of persons do not recognise that in the past . . . and
sometimes we have to look backwards just so that
you can look forward, and I am not talking about v ision) . But we need to remind the public that in the
past w e did have lots of guest workers who were on
the Island, but they actually did not . . . I know the
Honourable Member talked about the guest workers
and the impact on the wages and the impact on some
of those other things . But there are some other sides
that I think we need to understand.
A lot of those guest workers were here and
they were much younger in terms of the type of health that they had, they were much healthier, and therefore
they contributed lots of premiums into the system . But
they did not [ have] lots of expenses, lots of claims. So
we had that benefit . So when we were talking about
let’s get rid of guest workers , and all sorts of other
stuff . . . and I know at the time lots of people only
talked about the guest workers and the fact that per-sons did not have their properties and their rentals and all the other stuff . But they did not also realise
that these guest workers were helping us to keep our premiums down and they were helping us to keep our
claims experience down and the cost per population
would also help us —

Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Point of order, Mr.
Speaker.

Yes, Honourable Member.

POINT OF ORDER
[Misleading]
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: I think the Honourable
Member may be mistakenly misleading the House when she s aid that we had the guest workers in Bermuda and it was keeping the cost of healthcare and
premiums down. That is not so, Mr. Speaker, because
the history will show that health costs in this country have constantly, except for I think last year, have constantly and consistently risen every year without fail.

Minister.
Hon. Jeanne J. Atherden: Mr. Speaker, one of the
elements which one has to recognise is that you . . .
there is not just a question of whether the cost of
health has gone up, but when you start looking at the
cost of health per person, the people . . . the numbers
of persons that we were spreading our premiums, our expenses, over resulted in a lower cost per person for the population. And that is the point I was making and
I do not think the Honourable Member would turn
around and be able to dispute that.
But at the current time, Mr. Speaker, what I
am trying to make persons understand is that if you have more people that are the base of the population
and if they are not [making] as many claims, the
claims experience can result in lower premiums that
you have to charge. And that is the point that I wanted
to make because it has been suggested that, yes, the cost of health has gone up and the premiums that the
persons have to pay . . . and Mr. Speaker, I am not
going to go back and check the trend line in terms of
the increase in premiums since 2005, which I know they have doubled from 2005 to 2012 , and I know that
they have not doubled from 2012 to 2016 , and I know
in the last two years we have held the premiums level.
But the point I want to make, Mr. Speaker, is that we
are not just saying that we do not understand the i mpact that the health premiums are having on the pop ulation. We understand that it impacts them because it
is something that comes out of their pocket.
But also, Mr. Speaker, and I guess everybody
has a different way of looking at how you see what
happened. I heard the Honourable Member talking
about the indigent clinic and talking about persons
going down to the in digent clinic and not liking to go
there because people would know that you had challenges. Mr. Speaker, I also have had lots of people
telling me that they liked the idea of going to the clinic.
And I never called it the “ indigent ” clinic because to
me it was something that was tied to a subsidy that
was done many years ago. But it had nothing to do
with the people who were there and the challenges
that they were [having] and it had nothing to do with
the fact that they deserved to have a good health sy sBermuda House of Assembly tem to take care of them. And the fact that they could
go there and being at the hospital they had the range
of all sorts of [services] , the individuals that were there
rendering their service did not treat them any differ-ently than anybody else. They came t here, they got
good service and so, from our perspective, I do not want us to think that we look at individuals —even
now—to say that because they qualify for subsidy . . .
and we keep reminding ourselves . . . subsidies were
things that the Government gave with respect to the
population as a benefit.
Now whether it was an aged individual who
got a benefit, they were given a benefit from the Government to say that we are going to take care of your
expenses and we are going to make a contribution to it. So when you turn around and you start looking at
some of the things that have been thrown out with respect to the fact that the social insurance [benefit] has not increased, or is now just increasing after five
years, I think we have to understand that when we came in the Finance Minister found that the cupboard
was bare. And I have to recognise, and I think we all
need to recognise, that in the past when some of
these benefits were given out, which were things like,
you know, your reduction in your land tax and being
able to have a discount on your car [licence], all of
these things . . . yes, they were benefits that were
given out . But they had a price.
So the Government was able to take some of
the money that was in the cupboard and say , All right,
I’ve got money in the cupboard. I can turn around and
I can distribute these things because the population
will feel good about the gift they were getting. But like
with every gift , you always have to turn around and
. . . it is never a free gift ; it is always paid for. And in
the past when it was paid for , you had a nice wor kforce with lots of people there. The working public
turned around and paid for the gifts. And so right now when we came into Government , you had the Minister
of Finance having to look and say , I have got to make
sure that I balance the budget and I’ve got to make
sure that we look at what we have to do.
Now, I want people to recognise that seniors
were very important because I think they keep forgetting that, as it relates to the seniors, the subsidy was
still there as something that was given to them, but
also with respect to the HIP and FutureCare, Go vernment makes contributions to those funds to keep
the cost of the premiums down. That is Government
money which goes to keep the cost of the prem iums
down. So from that respect there is recognition that
our seniors are important and, therefore, there is recognition that Government is trying to use its money
and spread it around because we recognise that
healthcare is an important expense.
With respect to some of the other concerns
that were raised, I know we have talked about the cost
of living increases , and I know that there has been a
suggestion of different ways in which some of the more affluent could be taxed. I am not going to go into
that because I know that the Finance Minister has already said that he is looking at the tax base, and he is
looking at ways to make changes to how each person in Bermuda makes their tax contribution.
But I do want, Mr. Speaker, to make sure that
we not leave an impression that our seniors are not
important , because they are. We would not have
turned around and started to talk about . . . I mean,
not only the age ing and disability services, not only
talking about making sure that we put more emphasis on them . But also talking about what we are going to
do with respect to changing the legislation so that we
can focus more on issues with respect to seniors.
There was a suggestion that we are not tur ning around and understanding some of the health
challenges that sen iors have. We are; which is why
we are turning around and have the age ing at home
pilot and the a geing at home benefit. This is recogni sing that seniors were spending lots of their money having to go and live in homes and, therefore, if they
could age at h ome this would put money back in their
pockets, this would also make sure that their families
would be able to better care for them.
With respect to the suggestion of the Al zheimer’s and the dementia, we do recognise that that
is a problem and that is something that we are wor king on. We have a group, which is part and parcel of the Seniors Advisory Council, which is looking at
these things. What I found interesting was that when I
first came and I got involved and was looking at the
Ministry of Health, I understood (because I do not
know whether a lot of people did understand) that Sy lvia Richardson was originally set out to be a facility
which was going to effectively handle Alzheimer’s and
dementia cases . While it might have been created, but
the programm e, et cetera, did not exist. And so right
now we are in the process of looking at how we can turn and have a facility that can deal with these i ssues.
Now, I did also hear someone make reference
to the fact and ask why I have been saying that Go vernment should not go into this, that we should have
the private sector . The reason I say this, and I continue to say this, is the fact that the more that Government gets involved in doing something as opposed
to facilitating something, the more you end up having
the [number of people] that Government has under
their civil servants getting larger and larger and the
more constraints you put on the Government. Regar dless of which Government of the day it is, it is impo rtant for us to set up regulations. It is important for us
to set up a playing field that the private sector could
feel that they wanted to get into, and then we can
regulate the performance and we can regulate what is
being produced.
I keep reminding ourselves, and I want to r emind the listening public, that right now, if you start to
look at the opportunities , if we are able to have health
2324 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly insurance to cover some of these items, these needs
that the seniors have, then it makes it more financially
viable for the private sector to come in and to open up
the types of rest homes and nursing homes and some
of what I call the intergenerational -type homes that
are really necessary. Because we understand, from
the forward- thinking point of view, that more people
are going to live longer. Unfortunately, more peopl e
are also living longer with disease than they did before, so we have to turn and we have to make sure
that there are facilities out there able to cook for them.
Mr. Speaker, we also have to understand that
as we go forward we have to recognise that in Bermuda if we are able to turn and stop the trend of people who are having dementia and Alzheimer’s and
reduce the trend, that also works. Because it has also
been determined that for a percentage of the people
who get Alzheimer’s and dementia is the factor of
things like, you know, the factor of how active you are,
the factor of the mental stimulation, so there are a
number of things that can reduce the numbers or the percentage in your population that actually get it. So I
am not saying that we are going to stop it, but we understand and we are looking at all these things. So
our whole premise of ageing well in Bermuda, our
whole premise of the Well Bermuda strategy is to turn
around and focus not only on our general population, but also our seniors, to make sure that the impact on
the seniors is reduced.
I think, you know, to suggest that just because
we have not been able to increase it up until now somehow implies that we do not care, that we are not
putting as much emphasis . . . you know the only thing
. . . and a point was made earlier . And, Mr. Speaker, I
try not to get into what I call “ rock throwing, ” but every
now and then you have to just turn around and
say,. . . you know, if you go there, you have to decide
that the rock is going to come back. Bec ause there
was talk about the amount of money that had been
spent on . . . if you did this project there was
$500,000, if you did these other projects . . . and
mounting up and basically saying, Well, you could get
$2 million.
Well, Mr. Speaker, I have to turn around and I
would have to go back and I would have to say, let us
look at some of the projects that had the overruns. If
you did not have that overrun, there is money there.
So you cannot . . . you know , one of the difficulties of
when you try and go back and look at where money
has gone and you try and use hindsight, then you have to turn and say there was lots of money that was
available when the Government took over and, ther efore, the money was spent on a range of activities. I
am not going to go back and say if we were the Government we would we have spent as much money on
that particular project. All I am going to say is that
money was spent and the money is not there. And the
same way, if you want to go around and say $500,000
and whatever else, if you put it all together you can get some money, you can do that. Hindsight, as I say,
has—and it is a word that I do not use —vision.
And so , Mr. Speaker, I just want the general
public to know that just because the Finance Minister
has started to bring this forward now, if he could have been able to do it sooner, I know he would have because we have actually had conversations about b eing able to do something about the plight of our seniors, being able to do something about the sustainabi lity.
But now h aving gone backwards, I would like
to go forward for one brief moment because I think it
is important. The public needs to understand that
when we do have more jobs in Bermuda, and I do
think that it is now starting to come, we have the pr ojects that are c oming, we have the Consumer Price
Index, we have the indication that there is more
money being spent on construction materials and a range of other things that indicates that sales are going up —that is the beginning. And I have lots of people in the real e state sector telling me about projects
and properties . That means more people getting jobs.
And that will mean that there will be a growing workforce. That will also mean more people in the numbers
of people that we have to have health insurance. That
will mean the things that we are doing with respect to
the claims experience and we are actually very co nsciously looking at the things that are dealing with, with respect to generating claims activities, which
might be outside of the norm.
We have to turn ar ound and understand if we
can drive the cost of health claims down, if we can increase the numbers of persons that are out there supporting the insurance that we are charging, then
we can drive the premiums [down].
And we have committed ourselves, Mr.
Speaker, to mak ing sure of what we can do for our
seniors by holding the line on the basic health pr emium, by coming up with some of the pilots with r espect to the seniors who actually have lots of chronic
diseases to deal with, case management, as I say,
ageing at home, these are the things where the seniors will get the benefit.
As I sit down , I do not want our seniors to feel
that we do not understand that certain things are affecting them and we do not understand, as it relates to
the cost of living, that it is affecting them negatively.
Because another thing that I need to remind the general public of is, the same way we are working with
PAHO [Pan American Health Organization] to look at
getting drugs from their global fund so that we can reduce the cost of these drugs , and if we can reduce
the cost of the drugs , that means that the seniors who
are on these drugs will be able to pay less for them.
So, we are doing lots of things on lots of
fronts, Mr. Speaker, and I want our public and I want
us in this House to know that in recognition that while
we cannot do everything, we are trying to do lots of
pieces. And the Finance Minister is giving more as it


Bermuda House of Assembly relates to the social insurance, backed by what we are
doing in terms of holding the line in terms of heal th
premiums, what we are doing with respect to prescri ption drugs, what we are doing with respect to having
the health clinics (because remember there are health clinics in Somerset, St. George’s , and Hamilton)
where our seniors are able to go and get a lot of what
I call the basic elements with respect to your blood
pressure, you know, the normal things that you need
to have taken care of to make sure that you maintain
a healthy life . . . these things Government is doing
because it is the way of making sure that the seniors get whatever we can give them, even though we
would like to give them more, but get whatever we can
give them to make sure that the seniors who have
earned this benefit are able to know that their G overnment does care about them.
And I just want to say that we do care and we
will continue to work with the Finance Minister, we will
continue to work with the seniors as to things that we
can do to make their lives longer and healthier , and
we will continue to work.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you very much, Mr.
Speaker.
I am happy to make a contribution to t he di scussion, debate, on the Contributory Pensions
(Amendment of Contributions and Benefits) Order
2016.
Mr. Speaker, I think perhaps the one thing
people out there in the public perhaps are not necessarily understanding is that a lot of this stuff that we
are doing here around this . . . some issues which can
be very complicated and it is not easy to get your
head around. B ut there is one thing that I think the
contribution of the Honourable Member who sits in
constituency . . . I am sorry, the Honourabl e Minister
of Health, I cannot . . . her constituency number just
left my mind . But this is not a simple issue. The issue
of pensions . . . all the issues that pertain to our senior
population are not simple. They are not simple for the
One Bermuda Allianc e any more than they were for
any other previous Government.
And some of the things that the Honourable
Minister just disclosed and articulated are the same
things that the previous administration was dealing
with. No different.
I can remember, as a form er Health Minister,
having some of the same discussions. And it is not
like we do not . . . we are not aware of the resources
and expertise and other things that the Minister has available to her as she deals with the matters con-cerning health and seniors and all these things. They
are the same resources that I had available to myself and anybody who came after me and anybody prev iously. There are some very able and well -trained experts in the Health Ministry who are dealing with these policy issues every d ay and trying to get their heads
around the major questions of the costs that the Go vernment, particularly, is confronted with, with how we
are going to manage the resources that we have
available and the dollars that are made available to
manage the issues that concern our seniors.
This Order that we have here is a part of that
effort, though not a part of the Health Ministry’s brief, it
is a part of another aspect of Government. And as we
know from the data, you know, basically the health
care dollar in Bermuda is kind of creeping towards like
a billion dollars of total expenditure and that expend iture is shared by Government and the private sector.
Though a little bit more, I think, is the [public] dollar.
But these are issues that are continuously and, perhaps, even more so increasing for the private . . . I am
sorry, for the public sector in many ways.
We have the FutureCare Programme, we
have the subsidy, which includes indigent . . . and just
to comment on that, I know the Minister tried to sort of
talk away the sort of concept of the label of “indigent”
and how their reintroduction of, I guess, their version
of what was the clinic , does not necessarily have that
stigma. Well, that is what the law says. The law refers to that category of persons as “i ndigent.”
Now, perhaps we can change the legislation
and give it another term that might be more palatable, but it does not change the constituency that that par-ticular is identified in the Health [Insurance] Act 1974,
I think it is, or 1970, or what thes e components are to
do with what they do.
And certainly the previous administration
made a choice to remove that particular structure b ecause we felt a certain philosophy over the dignity of
the patient and the dignity of our senior people, or the
dignity of those who had a level of helplessness in our
society who required the Government to be supportive
of their care, and we wanted to afford them a better
quality experience.
Now, I do not know any of the data around
how that particular service has operat ed since it has
been put in place. I have not heard anything about it in
this House. Perhaps it would be interesting to know
from the Minister at some future point (it may not be material to this debate) as to the comparative expenditure. How much were we spending on the persons
as they took . . . or were being afforded private care
over us affording them the service at this new clinic?
What is the sort of comparative cost? Is it more of a
savings or have we essentially added more expense
to our necessity t o take care of this group of people?
I go back principally to pensions, but I say all
that, Mr. Speaker, to say these are complicated ques-tions . They are not simple in any way. And I am sure,
2326 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly and I know that this Minister is an extremely bright
and intell igent person, so I am sure it is no less of a
challenge for her than it has been for any Minister who
has held that place within her party or in any other.
These are tough questions and they are hard an-swers. And not only are the answers hard, but once you find an answer you still have to be finding answers as you go along because the questions of our seniors and how we deal with their care and their
needs, whether financial or health, are ongoing questions.
This is about human beings so they will be
here forever, these questions will be here forever, and
will have to be answered forever. What we do about pensions is going to go on forever . As long as there
are people who exist and live on the I sland of Bermuda, the question of how we manage this issue of our pensions and how we balance that with the r esources available to the Government is going to be an
eternal question. So even though this is an answer
today, the Minister has got to be looking for a new answer tomorrow. That is the reality.
And yes, the P rogressive Labour Party has its
own observations about what the Government is doing, what it has done for the past three and a half
years, but that is because that is what we are required
to do. And we have our own record around this which
people can exami ne, of what we did from when we
became Government up until 2011. We did our best to
maintain a steady rate of increases. Now, this Go vernment has not maintained the same momentum, but
I am sure there are all types of very valid reasons
which the Finance Mi nister and his colleagues can
say why. And fine, we do not need to get into any
heavy detail of what those are, but the reality is that
that has had an impact on the senior population and it
is not an impact that can be erased by one increase of
a benefit.
Some might argue that this whole system of
pensions has been underfunded, or perhaps has not
adequately provided what it needed to provide since
its inception. So people have been perpetually playing
catch up. Or , as the reality is, as some of my honourable colleagues have already stated, the very nature
of Bermuda’s society and the huge income gap between the people of African descent over those of European descent has also played a dynamic in this
in that the black community , which, essentially, has
been the less economically prosperous community,
did not have the education and the means and the resources to understand how, when this pension sy stem was set up, it could be properly applied to their overall lifespan in reference to what some people perhaps saw it to be their only income.
But the nature of employment back in the
1970s was different from employment now. Now pe ople are afforded . . . whether you are a chambermaid,
or a person who is a sanitation engineer, or you are a CEO, we all essentially ha ve access to the same i n-formation and care or advice on how we manage our
finances. Back in the 1970s insurance companies
were not giving people advice on pensions , on how to
manage their pension for their life. So some of the
people who were paying into pensions did not have a clue. So now we are confronted with some of these
income disparities from the same people who may
have started paying into this situation in 1970. And
then we also have the people who, perhaps, had a
whole working life prior to 1970 and when 1970 came
along they had no pension.
But it is only in very recent times, Mr.
Speaker, that people have been afforded the know ledge and opportunity and the means to understand
how they can appropriately fit a pension into their
working life. In fact , these days the insurance companies virtually demand you come and talk to them
about it , you know . That is what they do. And your
employer says , You will go to that pension consult ation or you might not keep your job. . . well, maybe not
that harsh, but they make it a requirement for you as
an employee to get that consultation. That was not the case back in 1970 or 1980, maybe not up until very recently.
And so not only with that lack of knowledge,
lack of information, lack of resources, the overall di sparity of income that perpetually has been a part of
the experience of being black in Bermuda, which is
being addressed by some other parties in this House
now, we have issues of race as well all fixed into this.
And the data speaks to this. There is a disparity of
income between people of certain ethnic groups in
this country over others. That also is playing.
So these are very complicated issues . And,
yes, we have seen over the last three years some very dramatic changes in the situation as it pertains to
our seniors. My Honourable Acting Leader who sits in
constituency 18 talked about the change of the CPI
[consumer price index] over a certain period of time, the change of certain other disparities which have
seen increases dramatically higher than the inc reases
that pensions have been maintained.
Now, I do not know (because this is not an
area of my expertise) whether it was even possible or
feasible for the pension over the time that it has ex-isted to track and sort of ameliorate or close that gap.
I do not know. That is, perhaps, a task for a very experienced analyst or a forensic accountant or som ebody who knows these things. I do not know. Maybe it
could have been done. Perhaps it can be done. Perhaps there is a way that if the tax review that the Ho nourable Finance Minister presumably is going . . .
some of these questions can be answered. What can
we do to perhaps make this Contributory Pension that
is a part of the fabric of our working society better?
What are some of the things that we can do?
And p erhaps it is somewhat like the health
question. How do you ensure that our outcomes are
better than what we are experiencing now? And there


Bermuda House of Assembly is a combination of things you can do—better diet,
more exercise—there are certain things that you can
do with your health to make sure your outcomes are
better . . . regular visits to the doctor . Well, maybe
there are some prescriptive things that can be done to
the pension system in Bermuda that can ultimately make sure that maybe in five, ten years, our outcomes , the benefits that are afforded our population,
knowing that we have an increas e in the population,
knowing that we have a declining labour population,
there is no guarantee that we are going to increase our labour population dramatically enough and in a reasonable time to compensate for some of what the
decline has been. Mr. Speaker, so what can we do
with the situation we have now to . . . steps that we
can do and the combination of things to better the outcomes going down the road?
Whatever those issues are right now that certainly Members of my party have tried to talk about,
we are not going to solve them within the term of the
OBA in the next year in which their term somewhat ends. And whoever wins the election after that may
not even fix it then, but we c an start some of the steps
now. We can investigate the steps now, we can know
what those steps are right now or in a reasonable
amount of time so that, perhaps, in 10 years or maybe
even less, we can have a better quality pension that
fits the circumstance s that we are in with the growing
seniors population, with their needs and health needs
having to be satisfied, with the greater expense and
cost that it is going to [cost] the community, not just
the public sector, which has decided in the past , certainly five or six years , to take a greater burden of that
obligation with the creation of other plans and even
this Honourable Minister , Ms. Atherden, has added
some features to the plan that seemingly are to act ually address the needs, specifically of the seni ors
population, which means that their needs are som ewhat the priority going forward.
So, we are going to have to perhaps even
create more stuff that we have not even thought
about, Mr. Speaker, to deal with this issue. And I
make my comments in that vein, in that what we do to
the pension contributions now is just dealing with the
here and now. And the Honourable Members on this side have made many points, some of them critical,
but some of them also trying to look at issues that
continue to plague our sit uation.
The Honourable Member from constituency 5
talked about how many persons have had to retire,
seemingly feeling that they are forced to retire. But the
reality in Bermuda, Mr. Speaker, is that . . . and I saw
this as we were devising and rolling out the Futur eCare Plan in the phases . Actually people between 65
and 75, most of them are still working in Bermuda.
Most of the senior population does not actually retire
at 65 anymore. And even if they do legally retire from
their jobs , they go find somethi ng else. That is the r eality. But we have a system that almost brings about a requirement for them to stop doing what actually they
need to do in respect of whether we tell them to do it
or not.
So these are the issues that centre around
this issue of pens ions. There are income issues which
also have to do with our taxation system. There are
issues that are even concerned with health. There are
so many and it is complicated, Mr. Speaker. So I say
this (and I am coming to a conclusion with my comments , in that we have already said that certainly we
are supportive of this ): There are many issues that
centre around this that make the question of this i ncrease for many people . . . e ven though it is needed,
there are certain mixed feelings about it.
People may f eel that the Government has
given their spending priorities to other things rather than to the issues that they feel this pension may be seeking to address, that benefits have gone to other things that do not need the benefits. And even though
we talk abou t things like the America’s Cup and that
here, Mr. Speaker, and we sometimes juxtapose that
against issues of expenditure, it is not a question of
whether those events like the America’s Cup are we lcome or not, it is the priority that the spending and the
Government’s expenditure has been around that.
These are the questions that the constituents put to
us. These are the questions and concerns that are
raised by people out there in the public , [it] is the
question of priority and whether, despite the fact t hat
the Minister of Health who just sat down, Mr. Speaker,
and tried to make sure it was clear that their Gover nment is concerned about seniors and in that , it does
not change the fact that people have felt that the
amount of concessions that are given to certain interests, the maintenance of certain concessions that have been given in the past, the priority given to certain aspects of spending that impacts them, whether it
be the pensions, whether it be education, whether it
be less money going to the heal th subsidy for the
hospital, the proposal to close things like Lamb Foggo
. . . all of these things have impacted on how people
feel.
And it is partially the responsibility of the Go vernment to make people understand that these sy stems will be maintained, that their needs will be sati sfied, that things like a pension which has become, at
least certainly since 1970, a level of certainty in the
lives of persons . . . people know that they should be
afforded a pension and they rely on that and it is something that they look forward to getting to assist
them as they move out of their working life, that it is not going to be depleted, that it is not going to be
eroded, that their earning power, irrespective of a r ecession, that perhaps this is going to be maintai ned
and that they are going to feel a sense of security and
a level of comfort , and that the Government and the
public sector are looking out for them.
So it is important that the Government understand this. We realise that the questions around these
2328 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly issue s of pensions which pertain to our seniors are
complicated. But it is also imping ing on the Gover nment to be looking ahead, Mr. Speaker, and making
decisions that make sure that any shortcomings that
may exist here and now that they put in place a pr escrip tion to deal with them over time so that future
generations of Bermudians who will have the benefit
of such structures will see their position improved. I
think that is important. That is how you build or rebuild
the confidence, rebuild the trust, and rebuild the hope
that people must feel in how they are governed and with those who are charged with taking care of their welfare.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

All right. Thank you. T hank you, Honourable Member.
The Chair will now recognise the Minist er for
Home Affairs, Minister Patricia Gordon- Pamplin.
You have the floor.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I intend to be brief in my contr ibution to this debate. I want to start off by acknow ledging and thanking the Finance Minister for recognising the importance of bringing pension increases to
this honourable House for the benefit of our seniors.
Well, we have heard, Mr. Speaker, Members
opposite indicate that , you know , an election must be
coming and, hence, we are responding to what might
be . . . what might go down as a nice sweet pill,
candy, as it were, because an election is coming.
You know , it is interesting as I sit on this side
and I watch the development of the political playbook
on the other side of the aisle. So now it is like , this
week it is an election is coming, we care and they do
not. That is this week’s playbook coming from Me mbers opposite.
But here is what is interesting, Mr. Speaker,
that I do not believe that the Finance Minister has for
one second thought in terms of an election coming.
The Finance Minister has listened to Members on our
side of the aisle and he has been able to . . . he has
been required to balance the money that he has
available to create additional benefits for our senior s
with respect to their pensions and to balance that
against the servicing of the debt that we have to service. I think that it is important for people to understand, Mr. Speaker, that when you borrow money you have to pay it back. And in paying it back you do not
just have to pay the principal, you are also required to
pay the interest on that debt. And the debt service that
we have inherited initially and with additional —

Yes, carry on, Honourable Member.

Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Mr. Speaker, let
me just say that the money that would be required in order to meet the additional expenditure for our seniors, as we have heard, we have heard go all over the
map from the cost of health care, to the cost of insurance, they raised . . .they raised FutureCare, they
raised all the cost of living for our poor seniors .
What the Honourable Members opposite need
to consider, Mr. Speaker, is look at FutureCare, when
we took over the Government —no, when they intr oduced FutureCare, let me go back to that, they intr oduced FutureCare for 65- year-old people with a pr emium cost of $300. That was for one year —$300. The
following year they brought, Mr. Speaker, the second
tranche of individuals who were eligible for Futur eCare, who were 70 and over, and their premium was
$600. Today the FutureCare premium is down to
$500- and-something. Yes, those who were paying
$300 had their premiums increased over time, but
those who were paying $600 had their premiums decreased over time. The purpose for which, Mr.
Speaker, was that those people who came on board on the second tranche had no differential to the benefits and the menu of services that were offered to
them other than the cost that they were paying in the
premium.
We took over the Government . We realised
there was an inequity . Therefore, something had to be
done to properly balance that particular aspect of things, Mr. Speaker. And in so doing we look ed at actuarial extrapolations to determine how this particular programme could be sustained and to be able to
make it fair so that people are paying the same price
for the same benefits that they are getting. So we put in a policy by saying if Government introduced into the
fund "X”-amount of money, then we would be able to
lower the premiums for those people who were r equired to pay $600- plus for their FutureCare prem iums. So when Members opposite say they on the other side raised the premium for FutureCare, that is
not entirely accurate. I think that they have to under-stand that we had to fix something that was fund amentally flawed in the process.

Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Point of order, Mr.
Speaker.

All right. Thank you.
Minister, carry on please.

Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Mr. Speaker, we
had to fix something that was fundamentally flawed. It
did not exist before, they brought it into being, they
charged $300 for the people who came the first year, they charged $600 for the people who came on in the
second year —that was fundamentally flawed, and we
fixed it.
So the entire construct of it, yes, it did come
under that former administration . I never had a challenge with that. I remember saying, Mr. Speaker, when we started talking about the benefits and started
talking about the difficulties that seniors had, Mr. Speaker, we recognised that on this side of the aisle.
We recognise that over the course of . . . I think I have
got it here somewhere on a chart, Mr. Speaker, over
the course of a nine- year, eight -year period of time
from 2005 through 2012, a seven- year period of time,
just the standard benefit HIP premiums had doubled
from $136 to $272. This is the sort of increase that
happened under that previous administration for which
the seniors, who are now requiring money to be able to pay to live, had to find that extra money in order to
pay some of those premiums.
Mr. Speaker, these are things that gover nments have to wrestle with. And we have to look at
how we can ensure that the benefits that our seniors
are able to obtain in order to be able to live with are appropriate given the responsibilities that the Finance
Ministry has in terms of the strain on the public purse
and how we are able to filter money through to be
able to pay for the various benefits.
The Honourable Minister of Health spoke to
the issue of the costs of healthcare and the premiums relating thereto and the claims experience relating to
healthcare which helped to drive up the costs of
healthcare, and we acknowledge that. But Mr.
Speaker, when those costs increase, when those
costs get higher, people have to pay for it. And they pay for it out of the pensions , you know, invariably out
of the pensions that they have, out of the expendable
income that they have at their disposal. And it has been a strain.
And, you know, I would like for the Finance
Minister to have been able to have said before, We’re
going to put more money in and seniors are going to
be able to get m ore benefit. And, you know , had he had the ability to do so he would have done so, because Lord knows that only a masochist would continue to be badgered by his colleagues time and time
and time again and not respond. But that was not the
case. The Honourable Member could only respond to the extent that there was money available to support
what it was that he was trying to do.

[Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, Deputy Speaker,
in the Chair]
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: And now, Madam
Deputy Speaker, it has nothing to do with whether an
election is coming or not. As I say, that is this week’s
playbook coming from the other side. It has nothing to
do with whether an election is coming. It has som ething to do with looking at the actuarial reports that
have come out for the pension funds to be able to . . .
because you will know on the opposite side of having
increased benefits, there are increased contributions,
that is just part of the equation to continue to make
that fund sustainable. And that sustainabil ity is going
to cost people more money , you know, your social
insurance cost is going to go up. But you have to have
an infusion of money into the fund in order to be able to have higher benefits coming out on the back end.
I can remember very clearly when we started
talking about having money coming in, money going out, it all falls in . . . whether we are doing this with this
specific pension fund, whether we are looking at the
consolidated fund, the principles are all the same. The
principle says that you cannot spend more money
than that which you have. So when I spoke about debt
servicing, which is a stranglehold on us as a people,
and we heard Members opposite criticise priorities in
terms of , You found money for this and you found
money for that, why couldn’t you find money for other
things? And, yes, you know, when I look at inves tments in projects that are meant to reap benefits or to
inure to the better good for the entire community, then
I start seeing it a little bit differently than when we start
raiding the public purse for capital expenditure and
money coming out to pay for things that cost twice as
much as they should have cost, because had that
money been in the kitty there would be more money
available for other things.
I remember very cl early when I first came into
this Ministry, I remember very clearly one Member opposite deciding that it was appropriate to sue me because I made the comment that if we had the
money , the $15 million or whatever the millions were
(it might have been six, I do not know, I cannot r emember the exact number at the moment ) that we put
into Port Royal —

[Inaudible interjection]
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: It was $15 [million]?
2330 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly —the monies that we put into Port Royal, if we
had that money in the kitty there would be more
money for the benefit of our seniors.
A Member opposite decided he was going to
sue me for making that statement because I refused
to withdraw the fact that he asked me to say that his company did not make that much money. I never said
that from the outset. I never . . . at no point did I ever
say that the Honourable Member’s company made
any or received all the money to which I referred to.
We spoke about the cost of planting some grass, as I put it at the time as I remember, up at Port Roya l.
That is what we spoke to. And, you know , that was
fine for the Honourable Member , because what ha ppens when you start to engage in frivolous activities ,
they come to naught . And that is exactly what happened in that instance. I was never required to go before a judge because I believe that the sensibility pr evailed ultimately that people were saying, you know ,
You cannot put words in my mouth. I know very
clearly and carefully what I articulated and as a result of what was articulated, there was no case to be a nswered, Madam Deputy Speaker. So these are the kinds of things that we have.
Now, we talked about how things are a little
bit difficult and, you know, the care and concern that
Members opposite feel towards our population and
how we can embrace t hem. You know , we had a
Member who sat in this House, a former Member Jim
Woolridge, who always said that the benefit that he
had from being in the Government was that he had his
back to the sun because he did not want to sit on the
side of the Opposition and have the sun shining in his
eyes. Well, I think the Members opposite are now experiencing that same feeling (that they are sitting opposite with the sun shining in their eyes ), and som ehow they are starting to think that maybe there is revelation here that they have some concern that
Members opposite do not have.
Well, Members can be absolutely assured that
on this side of the aisle it is our intention to do the best
that we can for the people of Bermuda. There are
times when we have to be able to say no to certain
things because we cannot afford it. We do not like . . .
we do not politicise or we do not play political football
with people’s lives. We look at what we can sustain
and we put forward those projects and policies that
are sustainable. And if that is a fault that we have ,
then let us be faulted forever, Madam Deputy
Speaker, because when you start to spend money that you do not have, then you continuously run yourself into a hole , and you know , it is a deep hole from
which you can, perhaps, ne ver recover.
And these are the kinds of things that we have
had to balance as a Government to ensure that we can provide for our people, that the money that we put into things like financial assistance and the like, a
mammoth amount of money, but necessary because
we have to ensure that our people are not left wanting for the basic necessities of life. I am not saying that
the previous Government did not do that, they did. We have had to carry that on. We have had to ensure that
we are looking at what polic ies can come into being
so that there is an enhanced business appreciation for
investment so that the benefits can be felt across the
country.
So when I hear Members opposite bring up,
you know, America’s Cup and the priorities of this Government, I just hope that the benefits that will i nure to the people of Bermuda from the America’s Cup,
that we can replicate that.
And I say that because , you know , if we could
see these types of things happening, so that people
can have more and therefore feel less strai ned, then
we will not have to have criticism . We hear that they
support the increase in the pensions and, you know ,
they would be extremely foolhardy to not support it,
but it is almost like , I support it, but . . . I give you
credit, but . . . I think you did a wonderful job, but . . .
and it is always that “but” that , you know , negates the
whole benefit of what it is that they are supporting in
the first place.
So I want to just finish by saying that I applaud the Finance Minister for acquiescing to the C hinese torture of that water dripping on his head day after day after day coming from every one of the Members on this side of the aisle, coming from our
constituents and knowing that he has had to respond,
knowing that he then has to . . . the Honourable Member does not have any hair on his head as [he] says.
The water wore through it all .
But you know, it is a sensitive Minister who
looks at the umbrella picture to understand what it is
that we can do and what it is that we are unable to do.
And now he fi nds himself in the position where he can
increase the pension benefits and he . . . you know, it
comes at a cost , and we recognise that.
As the Honourable Member from [constit uency] 29 (I believe it is ) mentioned, the Honourable
Member Mr. De Silva mentioned that people do not
mind if you have to pay a little bit extra because somebody else pays . . . you know , can pay a little bit
less and it kind of equates and balances out. And the Finance Minister has indicated he is looking at that entire structure. It was not going to be put in place for
this financial year because, you know, you cannot do
things because it is politically expedient. You have to
do the things that make sense, sustainable sense.
So, in order to be able to do something that is
of that kind of benefit you have to ensure that you think it through appropriately , and that is one of the
reasons why I applaud the Finance Minister for taking
his time and looking at how we can create a better,
more equitable system that the Members opposite
never thought it was important enough to do, and now
we are required to do it. Like I said, we continue to fix
what they broke or continue to fix the things that they did not think were broken, did not understand were


Bermuda House of Assembly broken, and did not believe that they needed attention. Our Minister is looking at those things. We are
putting in place policies that —

Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Point of order, Madam
Deputy Speaker.

The point of order is?

POINT OF ORDER
[Misleading]

Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: The Honourable Member is
certainly misleading the House when she makes that
statement about looking at things that need to be, you
know, that were broken under us. I would just like to
point out, Madam Deputy Speaker, that before we introduced FutureCare there was nothing. When we had a $600 premium , people who were paying $1,200
and more opted for the $600 option. So let us just r emember that.

Thank you, Member.
The Chair recognises the Minister.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I think the Honourable Member’s point of order is probably about 10
minutes late, but anyway I will accept it . Some people
are a little slower than others .
Thank you, Member.
But you know all I say is that when the kitty
was being raided, if we had that lev el of concern being
expressed from the front and backbench—

Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Point of order, point of order, Point of order!
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: —and there would
have been —

One moment, I can only have
one person speaking. Thank you.
Your point of order is?

POINT OF ORDER
[Impu ting improper motive]

Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: The Honourable Member is
[imputing] improper motive when she said when the
kitty was being raided. I would like to have that wit hdrawn plea se.

Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Well, when we
were paying out twice as much money —
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Point of order, point of order!

Can I just . . . can I just hear it
through, please , and then . . . thank you.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Madam Deputy
Spea ker, when we had budgets for $68 million for
Berkeley School and it came in at $120- something
million, when we had budgets for Heritage Wharf
which came in significantly higher, when we had
budgets for Port Royal that came through significantly higher, it meant that we were spending far more money than we ought to have spent . And as a result
the kitty was being raided. You know , I am not saying
anybody was stealing anything, I am saying money
was haemorrhaging out.

Thank you, thank you.
The Chair recognises the Member from constituency 29.
Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Thank you, Madam Deputy
Speaker.
So the Honourable Member is admitting then
that she, when she was a Member of the UBP, raided
the kitty because we know that the airport went
100 per cent over budget, Westgate Prison went another 120 per cent over budget, so the Honourable
Member is saying that they raided the kitty before we even became Government.

Thank you, Member. Thank
you.
The Chair recognises the Minister.

Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you,
Madam Deputy Speaker.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I am not saying that
at all because the Honourable Member will know I
was not a Member of this House during those days ,
so if the—

[Inaudible interjections ]

Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: I was not a Member of the House.

[Inaudible interjection]

Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: No, sir.

Member, Member! I should
only ever hear one person speaking at a time.
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Thank you,
Madam Deputy Speaker.
So if the Honourable Member wants to just to
confirm his facts, if he sees it differently I am always happy . . . if I ever ma ke a mistake, I am the first to
acknowledge it. But the Honourable Member is mi staken. I came to this H onourable House in 1999.

Hon. Zane J. S. De Silva: Point of order.

Thank you, Member.
The Chair recognises the Minister.

Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: That is not a fact,
but the Honourable Member will have the opportunity
to confirm his facts if he so chooses. We know that that is usually not very important, but if he so chooses
he can take the opportunit y to confirm his facts.
But with that said, Madam Deputy Speaker, I
just want to end by applauding the Honourable F inance Minister for being sensitive under these ci rcumstances and knowing that we do have support
from Members opposite. T hey would like for it to be
higher ; we would like for it to be higher . We would be
able to make sure that it is higher as the economy
gets better, as money is able to be expended in a
more appropriate way, and as seniors are going to be
able to find themselves in a situation in which they have better benefit s.

[Hon. K. H. Randolph Horton, Speaker, in the Chair]
Hon. Patricia J. Gordon -Pamplin: Let me just also
point out, if I do nothing else, Mr. Speaker, that if an ybody reaches the age of 65 and they are still working,
it is important that they are aware that they are eligible
to sign up for their contributory pensions. I say that
because I believe that there may be a misunderstanding that as long as you are still working you are not
entitled to get a pension. That works in terms of your
. . . the pensions you might have on your job, as long
as you are still working you may not be entitled to claim the benefits of those pensions. But for the purposes of the social insurance stamp that you are pa ying in, when you hit the ag e of 65 , you are eligible to
make the application. A nd if you do not make it at the
appropriate time, you are penalised. That is the way
the legislation reads , and I just want to make sure that
we do not have anybody being penalised by not being
able to get the benefits out of the Contributory Pension Fund to which they have, not just paid, but to
which they are entitled.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

All right. Thank you, Honourable Member.
Any other Honourable Member care to speak?
Then the Cha ir will refer back to the Minister,
Minister Richards.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have just one or two remarks, Mr. Speaker ,
insofar as the timing of this . As some of my co lleagues have pointed out, the timing of this increase
has to do with actuarial review . As I promised in the
Budget Statement earlier this year , we would review
this once we had facts and figures in front of us. So
we have done that and this is the result of it.
Prior to that, quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, we
have been . . . today we have been castigated for not
doing something else since we have been the Gov-ernment . But the rule has been pretty well established
that if you increase benefits and pensions , you have
to increase contributions into the fund plus 2.5 per
cent. And quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, we had to make a judgment call on whether we would cause people who are working in Bermuda to have to have a greater
deduction taken from their pay packet during the time
of a recession, and the judgment was made t hat the
economy was too weak . People’s jobs were too fragile
to make that call , so nothing was done up until now.
So we felt our hands were tied during that period because there was no growth in the economy. There is
growth now, so we can take action, it i s as simple as
that.
I think it is important to remember, Mr.
Speaker, that the Government does not stand behind
the Contributory Pension Fund. It does not. There is no Government guarantee on the Contributory Pension Fund, not like the PSSF, not like the Public Se rBermuda House of Assembly vice Superannuation Fund. The Public Service Superannuation Fund, if it runs out of money, the money
has got to come out of the Consolidated Fund. Not so
with the Contributory Pension Fund, which is social
insurance.
So it puts a greater burden on those of us who
are managing that fund to manage it prudently because if that fund runs out of money, social insurance
runs out of money. So that is really a very, very important thing to bear in mind when you start making, sort
of, expansive statement s, some of which I have heard
today.
So the other thing, Mr. Speaker, is that the
demographics are working against the Contributory
Pension Fund. We all know that we have an a geing
population here in Bermuda, like in other Western
countries, and what that means is that there is a growing number of people taking money out of the fund and there is a shrinking number of people putting
money into the fund. So that requires an extra set of
prudential measures. Government does not stand b ehind it and demographic s are working against it. So
we cannot just sort of say , Well, let’s increase the
payout of this fund, without looking at the cons equences. The consequences in this case are the r esponsibilities , and are very heavy indeed.
For us to increase payouts from this fund over
the ability of the fund to pay would not be prudent, but would be reckless. And if we were proposing that t oday, Mr. Speaker, if we were proposing that today,
then that would be purely a political gesture, but that
is not what we are doing. We are making a prudential
or prudent judgment here, a judgment based on facts, a judgment based on prudent estimates. So the charges that we are just doing this out of politics just
do not hold water at all.
Now, I was interested to hear the Honourable
Member on the other side who speaks for Finance
make the suggestion that the Contributory Pension Fund should be progressive. And, Mr. Speaker, that
really was a cynically political gesture. It really was.
The Honourable Member was in the Ministry of F inanc e for a number of years as Junior Minister and he
did not do anything about it then.
You know, Mr. Speaker, talk is cheap but actions are golden. Let us face it . All right? And we are
taking action on that lack of progressivity. We are
sticking our necks out; we are doing it on payroll tax.
The other side did not do that . In 14 years they did not
do it. The labour government did not do it, but we are
doing it. So I do not want to hear any sort of groaning
about a lack of progressivity in anything coming fr om
that side because talk is cheap, action is golden, and
we are taking action on that.
In any case, Mr. Speaker, the whole construct
of the Contributory Pension Fund is not based on an ything to do with income. If we had to do that, it would
have to be a total reconstruction of the fund and the
assumptions and everything. And you know, perhaps, that might come one day, but the judgment of this
Government is to do something about the tax system
first, and that is what we are doing.
There has been talk about seniors having less
money , less discretionary income because of sk yrocketing healthcare costs. That is true. There is no
doubt about that. But Mr. Speaker, skyrocketing
healthcare costs in Bermuda has a reason behind it.
And healthcare costs in Bermuda have skyrocketed
because of the US modelled chargemaster system
that was introduced by the former Government. It
really skyrocketed healthcare costs in Bermuda where
now healthcare in Bermuda, I read somewhere r ecently, is the highest in the world, even hig her than
the model that we modelled it after, the US, which is the second highest in the world. A ll right?

[Inaudible interjection]

Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: So you know —

[Gavel]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: It is easy to say , Yeah,
you know, all this money is coming out of pensioners’
pay packet s, but you have got to take responsibility for
your actions.
You know , we have got a system now that
charges everybody for every Band- Aid, every little
aspirin, everything! And we have a system that has become enormously expensive, enormously burdensome. So when Members on the other side start to
make those statements, we have to remind voters,
people out there listening, who bears the responsibility
for that. These, in fact, Mr. Speaker, are PLP chickens
that have come home to roost.
There was also a matter of enforcement that
was mentioned. That is a problem. Enforcement of mainly delinquent employers, people who withhold
money from people’s pay packet , and then the employees think that the contribution has be en made to
the government and, in fact, the employer spent the
money. This is clearly stealing; there is no other word
for it. It is a fraudulent transaction —fraudulent —it is
stealing.
Recently we have increased–– I certainly had
to bite the bullet on this one because I did not want to
do it––but Mr. Speaker , we have increased the staff of
the Department of Social Insurance to deal with this
matter. I cannot remember the number of people I
authorised, but we had to authorise quite a few more
people working in that department to tackle this problem. So it is a problem that is known to us and we
have taken action to try to fix that problem.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I have been characterised
this afternoon as a “Grinch ” and the Grinch that stole
Christmas , or whatever other kind of Grinch, for telling
people that money does not grow on trees. But you
know, Mr. Speaker, I do not know how a statement of
2334 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly fact can be offensive, particularly when it was not, as I
remember very clearly —and there are recordings to
show it —that I did not say that in an offensive tone,
[but] as a statement of fact to make a point about this
same issue that just because you want it, it does not mean that it can happen. Even to a situation, Mr. Speaker, just because you need it, it does not necessarily automatically follow that you can get it because
there are other things out there that come to bear on
whether or not you can get your needs satisfied.
So that was not said in an offensive tone at
all. But what I can say, Mr. Speaker, is that this G rinch
is taking away something. This Grinch is taking away
the out -of-control deficit that he inherited from an irr esponsible former Government. I am taking that away.
This Grinch is ensuring that the grandchildren and the
descendants of the same seniors w e have been tal king about inherit a solvent Government and inherit a solvent social security fund. That is what this Grinch is
doing about this problem. So that is what this is about
today, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, this is about solving a difficult
situa tion but within the parameters of prudent financial
management. That is what this is about.
So with that, Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask
that the Order be approved and that a message be
sent to His Excellency the Governor.

And we will now move on to Order
No. 3 in the name of the Minister of Finance as well .
. . Order No. 4, sorry. It is the Investment Funds
Amendment Act 2016.
So the Cha ir will recognise the Minister of F inance again.

BILL

SECOND READING

INVESTMENT FUNDS AMENDMENT ACT 2016

Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I move that the Bill entitled the
Investment Funds Amendment Act 2016 be now read
a second time.
And in doing so, Mr. Speaker —

Sorry.

Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Well, it is nice to have
some levity in an otherwise gloomy day.
Mr. Speaker, so I am presenting to the H onourable House today the Bill entitled the Investment
Funds Amendment Act 2016.
The purpose of the Bill before the House t oday is to make amendments to the Investment Funds
Act 2006 to enhance the powers of the Bermuda
Monetar y Authority to effectively regulate the inves tment fund industry in Bermuda and to meet appropr iate international standards by means of the making of
directions in case of emergency, the imposition of civil
penalties, the publication of a censure, the maki ng of
prohibition orders, the use of injunctive relief , and to
introduce associated procedures.
Mr. Speaker, the Bermuda Monetary Authority
is the single regulator of the financial industry in Bermuda with the principal objectives that include the s upervi sion and regulation of any financial institution that
operates here. In order to achieve that purpose, in
2012 amendments were made to the Insurance Act
1978, the Banks and Deposit Companies Act 1999, the Investment Business Act 2003, and the Trusts
(Regul ation of Trust Business) Act 2001. Those
amendments introduced a consistent and enhanced
set of enforcement powers and associated procedures
across all of these sectors. The Corporate Service
Provider Business Act 2012 included the same set of uniform powers.
Mr. Speaker, the Bill introduced today intr oduces the enhanced enforcement powers and proc edures to the investment fund industry in Bermuda and is necessary in order to achieve uniform applicability
of enforcement powers across all financial sectors of
Bermuda.
Mr. Speaker, these enhanced enforcement
powers are further required in order to meet appropr iate international standards being set by, for example, the Financial Action Taskforce (FATF) and the Eur opean Securities and Markets Authority. Increasingly ,
the quality and standards of a jurisdiction are being evaluated by reference, either wholly or in part, to the
powers available to the regulator to manage misconduct and enforce regulatory standards. The previous
amendments to the legislation relat ing to the other
financial sectors underli es the lack of regulatory po wers in the investment funds area and it is highly desi rable that such powers be available for use, and as a


Bermuda House of Assembly demonstration to international standard setting bodies
of the quality and sta ndard of the regulation of the f inancial sector in Bermuda.
Mr. Speaker, the Bill makes provision for such
matters as: the issuance of directions, the imposition
of civil penalties, the making of a prohibition order, and the power to publish information a bout any matter
to which a decision notice relates. It also makes prov ision for the BMA to issue and publish a Statement of
Principles which sets out the matter in which it will . . .
or proposes to act in relation to such matters. The Bill makes further provision for associated procedures designed to achieve due process.
Mr. Speaker, the Bill went out for consultation,
and a number of comments were received by stak eholders within the investment funds industry , and
those comments were considered.
Mr. Speaker, thanks are extended to the
agencies which have provided assistance in the
preparation of this Bill, including, of course, the Bermuda Monetary Authority, the Bermuda Asset Man-agement Committee, obviously, the Minister of F inance, and the Attorney General’s office.
And with those comments, Mr. Speaker, I i nvite other Members to participate.

No problem, Mr. Speaker, I understand. Mr. Speaker, thank you very much.
As with all of these types of bil ls, they typically
enjoy bipartisan support. I call it the “Axis of Bermuda
Inc.” where the regulator, the legislators, and industry,
work hand in hand to make sure that we can advance
what we need to do to make sure that we maintain our
reputation and I guess meet all of the various changing international standards. I understand the reason
for this. We had received a briefing from technical off icers inside of the Ministry of Finance that has been
shared with our Members of caucus. We have no objection to t his Bill and it can move forward.
The only question that I would have for the
Minister of Finance is, can he give us an update on
the . . . I guess you could say, growth or progress that
the Government has had with attracting or increasing
the asset management business in Bermuda. I under-stand that the reason for the Investment Funds Act,
for these changes, which were made in lots of other
regulatory acts, were to make sure that we could maintain our attractiveness so as to get more funds
here and to compete against one of our competitors,
of course, the Cayman Islands. So I was hoping when
the Minister has a chance to respond if he could update the House and the public on the progress in that sphere and whether or not we are actually making
progress in the asset management space.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Honourable Member.
Any other Members care to speak?
Then Minister we revert back to you, Minister
Richards.

Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have my technic al people here, maybe they
can come up with those numbers. Certainly I do not
have them in my head.
But with those very brief remarks, Mr.
Speaker, I move that the Bill be committed.

It has been moved that we move
clauses 1 through 3.
Any objections to that motion?
No objections.
Agreed to.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam
Chairman.
Clause 1 provides a citation for the Bill.
2336 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly Clause 2 amends the principal Act in section 2
to insert and define the terms “warning notice” and
“decision notice .” A warning notice, which is fully d efined under the new section 67J, shall be given by the Authority where it proposes to impose a civil penalty under the new section 67A. A decision notice, which is fully defined under the new section 67K, shall be
given by the Authority where it decides to impose a
civil penalty under the new section 67A.
Clause 3 amends the principal Act to insert a
new section 2B to make provision for the BMA to i ssue and publish a Statement of Principles which sets
out the manner in which the BMA will or proposes to
act in relation to such matters as: the power to grant
or revoke an authorisation; the exercise of its powers
in relation to the grant, revocation, and restriction of a
licence under Part III of the principle Act; obtaining
and requiring the production of documents; the iss uance of directions in accordance with sections 30 and
51; the imposition of civil penalties under section 67A;
the publication of a s tatement relating to an authorised
fund or fund administrator under section 67C; the
power to make a prohibition order under section 67E ,
and to publish information about any matter to which a
decision notice relates under section 67M.
The BMA is required to also publish a new
Statement of P rinciples or a statement of change of
principles in the same manner in which it published
the original Statement of Principles in the event it pr oposes to make a material change to the published
version.
Those are claus es 1 through 3.

Thank you. It has been moved that clauses 4 through 13
be moved.
Are there any objections to that motion?
No objections.
Agreed to.
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Clause 4 amends the
principal Act in section 26(1)(b)(i) to provide that the
statement confirming that the fund has at all times
during the preceding year been in compliance with its
requirements under the Act , et cetera, shall now be
provided in such form as the Authority may prescr ibe.
Clause 5 amends the principal Act by repealing and replacing the current provisions of section 31 with provision for the issuance of either a warning or
decision notice by the Authority where it proposes to
or gives a direction under section 30 of the principal
Act.
Clause 6 amends the principal Act by inser ting a new section 31A to empower the Authority to give directions in the case of urgency, similar to the
powers exercised under other regulatory Acts.
Clause 7 amends the principal Act by repealing sections 34 and 35 as new measures and proc edures are proposed to be adopted under the Bill in this regard.
Clause 8 amends the principal Act in section
47 to include a requirement for a licensed fund admi nistrator that fails to submit the relevant statem ent of
compliance or noncompliance under Part III to the
Authority to be liable to a civil penalty of $5,000 for every week or part of a week that it is in default.
Clause 9 amends the principal Act by repealing and replacing the section 48 providing for offences in line with the new disciplinary measures being intr oduced by the Bill.
Clause 10 amends the principal Act by inser ting a new section 51A to provide for the Authority to
issue a direction in urgent cases.
Clause 11 amends the principal Act by repe aling and replacing section 53 to require that where the
Authority proposes or decides to issue a direction to a
fund administrator, then the Authority must give that
fund administrator a warning notice and a decision
notice, as the case may be.
Clause 12 amends the principal Act in section
55 to provide for a licensed fund administrator or an
operator of an authorised fund (as the case may be)
to appeal against a decision of the Authority taken in relation to the imposition of a disciplinary measure.
Claus e 13 amends the principal Act in section
64 to define the documents to be produced to a person appointed to carry out an investigation on behalf
of the Authority and to provide for the recovery of
costs of an investigation.
Those are clauses 4 through 13.

Correct, thank you.

Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Clause 14 amends the
principal Act to inser t a new section 64A to widen the
scope for investigations by the Authority beyond the
current scope of investigating non- licensed authorised
or exempted business. The new section will provide
for investigations with respect to breaches of requir ements imposed by or under the Act , and investigations
into the fitness and propriety of individuals who perform functions relating to a licensed activity. In addition, power is given to investigate investment funds or fund administrators in relation to a business carried on
at the time when they were licensed; and investigations in relation to the ownership and control of former
investment funds or administrators at a time when they were licensed.
Clause 15 amends the principal Act in section
65 by changing the exist ing heading to “Power to r equire production of documents”; making consequential
amendments to the section and extending the applic ation of the provisions of the section to any person
connected with a person under investigation.
Clause 16 amends the principal Act in section
66 to make consequential amendments in connection
with the new provisions on investigation proposed under the amended section 64.
Clause 17 amends the principal Act to insert
new Parts VA “Disciplinary Measures” and VB “N otices” and new s ections 67A to 67M. The new prov isions will empower the Authority to impose civil pena l-ties for failure by licensed persons to comply with any
requirement of or for contravening any prohibition i mposed by or under the Act. In determining the appr opriate le vel of penalty, the Authority is required to take
into account the provisions requiring that the fine must
be effective and proportionate to the breach as well as
dissuasive. The BMA is precluded from imposing a
fine if the BMA is satisfied that the person concerned
took all reasonable steps and that they exercised due
diligence to ensure compliance.
Clause 18 amends the principal Act to insert a
new section 73A to provide a mechanism for the r ecovery of civil penalties imposed under the Act. Power
is given for the BMA to recover the amount owing by
way of civil proceedings in court. Provision is made
requiring that where a person is convicted of a crim inal charge; no civil penalties can be imposed relating
to the same matter and vice versa.
Clause 19 makes provision for consequential
amendments to the principal Act.
Clause 20 amends the Investment Funds
Amendment Act 2013 so as to “grandfather” funds exempted under the repealed section 7 for an add itional year in order to give adequate time for relevant
funds to be reclassified under the proposed exempt
fund regime.
Clause 21 provides for commencement of the
Act by notice published in the Gazette and provides
for the appointment of different days for different pr ovisions.
Those are clauses 14 through 21.

It has been moved that the Bill be
reported to the House as printed.
Are there any objections to that motion?
No objections.
Agreed to.
[Gavel]
Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Madam
Chairman.

[Motion carried: The Investment Funds Amendment
Act 2016 was considered by a Committee of the
whole House and passed without amendment.]

[Pause]
House resumed at 4:10 pm
[Hon. K. H. Randolph Horton, Speaker, in the Chair]

REPORT OF COMMITTEE

INVESTMENT FUNDS AMENDMENT ACT 2016

Thank you, Honourable Members.
The second reading of the Investment Funds
Amendment Act 2016 has been approved.
We move on now to Order No. 5 which is the
America’s Cup Amendment Act 2016 , and that is in
the name of the Minister for Economic Development ,
Dr. Grant Gibbons.
You have the floor.

BILL

SECOND READING

AMERICA’S CUP AMENDMENT ACT 2016

Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Yes, thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I move that the Bill entitled the
America’s Cup Amendment Act 2016 be now read the
second time.

Thank you.
Are there a ny objections to that?
So, Minister , please carry on.

Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, the purpose of the Bill before the
House today is to make various amendments to the
America’s Cup Act 2015, which is the principal Act,
including provisions for the protection of America’s Cup [AC] related logos and words, land tax relief for
ACBDA, customs import duty relief for uniforms for the
America’s Cup teams, customs import duty relief for
goods for the Red Bull Youth America’s Cup Bermuda
team and the Endeavour Community Sailing team, and to address certain temporary importation relief
procedures, which when operational are problematic
for Her Majesty’s Customs.
Since the introduc tion of the Act in early 2015
the America’s Cup Event Authority (that is the ACEA) has established additional logos for the America’s Cup
Louis Vuitton World Series of events , as well as the
event names. The Bill seeks to have the brand protec-tion provisions in section 19 of the Act extended to
these new names and logos.
Mr. Speaker, one of Bermuda’s responsibil ities for AC35 is to deliver certain venues in the Royal
Naval Dockyard for the purposes of the event. The venues include sites for the team bases, media and
broadcast centres, storage facilities, volunteer and
hospitality centres, parking lots, boat berthing, back of


Bermuda House of Assembly house operations, and the America’s Cup Event Vi llage.
ACBDA Limited leases the venues from the
West End Development Corporation on behalf of the
Government. Under section 3(8) of the West End D evelopment Corporation Act 1982, ACBDA Limited, as
a WEDCO tenant is liable for the payment of land tax
under the Land Valuation and Tax Act 1967. The Bill
seeks to exempt ACBDA from land tax for venues
leased in Dockyard for the purposes of the America’s
Cup so that Government monies which would otherwise have been paid in respect of land tax could be spent on the delivery of other commitments for the
event.
Mr. Speaker, Honourable Members will recall
the tight time frame available to prepare Dockyard for
the relocation to Bermuda of the Oracle Team USA
and the consequent ial construction work in tenancy
which commenced in early 2015, therefore, the Bill
seeks to make the exemptions retrospective from the
operative date of the America’s Cup Act 2015.
Mr. Speaker, as previously announced, [the]
ACEA and ACBDA have engaged a Bermuda team to
participate in the America’ Cup Red Bull Youth Races.
ACEA also established the Endeavour Community
Sailing Pr ogramme which is intended to be a benefit
for young local sailors and a legacy of the 35
th America’s Cup. Companies have been established for both organisations. Since they operate outside of the
ACEA and the teams, these companies are not ent itled to cust oms import duty relief for goods required
for the programmes, which are supported by don ations. The Bill seeks the same provisions of Customs
Procedure Code 4140 of the Bermuda Customs Tariff which allows 0 per cent duty for other youth organis ations and t he St. John’s Ambulance Brigade to be extended to the Endeavour Community Sailing [Programme] and the America’s Cup Red Bull Youth Bermuda Team for uniforms and equipment.
Currently , the uniforms for the team sailors
that participate in AC35 World Series, Qualifiers , and
Finals do not qualify for import duty relief and are extremely high tech and costly. The Bill seeks for the
teams to be exempt from paying customs import duty on the uniforms that are used during the AC35 Sailing
events.
Mr. Speaker, goods imported by ACEA, the
Regatta officials , and the teams for the purposes of
the America’s Cup are imported under temporary i mportation reliefs. This has proven to be problematic
since some of the goods are not considered temporary and also some types of goods will be difficult to
trace, that is, for example, materials required for boat
repairs, including glue and paint which will not be
available for inspection by the Customs Department at
the end of AC35. In other words , the materials will be
consumed when applied to the boats, which will subsequently leave the I sland and the materials will not
be available in the state in which they originally ar-rived on the Island. Another example is office furniture
imported for the America’s Cup office that is intended
to leave Bermuda at the end of the event.
All importers are eligible to claim the relief in
respect of qualifying goods. When a supplier does make a claim for relief , that supplier is at first the
holder of the authorisation to import the relevant
goods. That authorisation must be transferred to the
client, in this case the America’s Cup Event Authority.
This transfer necessitates an administratively burde nsome three- step process which has become a cha llenge for the Customs Department. As such, the Bill seek s to insert a suitable new end- use relief with an
eligible beneficiary restricted to ACEA and any of its designated commercial partners , or a t eam or any of
its designated commercial partners or a Regatta o fficial. The end- use conditions would require that the
qualifying goods must be used only for the purposes of importing, installing, using, maintaining, removing
or exporting goods correctly imported by an eligible
beneficiary under Customs Procedure Codes 5006, 5008 , and 5022, which are temporary importation r eliefs.
The Bill also seeks for the amendments to be
made retrospective with effect from the operative date
of the America’s Cup Act 2015. This will allow the
necessary corrections to entries recorded in the Cus-toms database so that the relevant goods are assoc iated with the new end- use relief.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We will be supporting this
Bill and I think when we looked at the Minister’s presentation the requests that the Government is making are reasonable and acceptabl e.
One myth that has been out there in the
community is that the Progressive Labour Party does
not support the America’s Cup. There is a myth that
we want to see it fail. And I am here to reinforce that
this is not the case. We on this side understand the
importance of this to our economy, we understand the
hope that it will engender in the hearts of our people,
and we understand the benefit it will produce at some
level on the global stage.
Our concern from the start has been return on
investment, inclus ion, opportunity , and diversity.
Those have been our concerns, that the widest range
of people in our country get the full impact of this fantastic event.
2340 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly And Mr. Speaker, we on this side will continue
to push for Bermudians to get the full benefit of thi s.
And we have to take this moment to commend the
America’s Cup group and Sir Russell Coutts for the
Endeavour Community Programme in terms of being able to widen the scope of sailing. For many of us as young people this was, rightly or wrongly, viewed as a
white sport. It was viewed as exclusionary . It was
viewed as exclusive and elite and privileged. And the
opportunity for our young men and women to have a
chance to be exposed to this aspect of their country, this aspect of our history, and become a part of it is, I
think, going to have benefits socially for years to
come.
But Mr. Speaker, when we look at how the
America’s Cup was introduced, the Government has
made some missteps in my opinion and in our opinion
that have made the transition a little bit less smooth
than it should be and it made support [for it] a little bit
slower to generate than we would have hoped. It was announced in the middle of a very bitter by -election,
so the announcement was viewed through the scope
by at least a significant part of the community as pol iticking, rightly or wrongly. The motorcade that
launched the Cup’s arrival in Bermuda was noteworthy for its lack of diversity , and even while it is a minor
point, the greeting of the Cup with the Scottish bag-pipe player was not reflective of the community and our culture, only a part of it. And so these messages
created, in some people’s minds, a sense that this is
not about us, this is not for us, this is for other people.
And I think that when we go through and we
look at the A CBDA, which is doing fantastic work, it is
not as diverse as it could be. And all of these things
together created the impression and reinforced the
belief that this is not for everyone. You compound that
with . . . when you see companies benefitting such as
A.S. Cooper’s and Gibbon’s Company, if it was a Pr ogressive Labour Party Minister , who had a Simmon’s
company that was benefitting, there would be certainly
a much more hostile reception from the OBA -leaning
media. And so when we combine these things it creates a sense that this is not for us , and I think we encourage the Government to continue to push, to join
us in pushing for more inclusion, more diversity , and
more participation from the masses of our people.
A lot of our Bermudians want this to suc ceed
and I truly believe, having been to the AC in Chicago,
Bermuda can put on the best —the best —showing of
any of the other countries that have ever had this b ecause we have what they lack —Bermudians.
And so, Mr. Speaker, I believe that as time
gets closer people will begin to see the benefits. I believe people will begin to get more excited about it and
they will begin to become more willing to participate.
But we have to remain vigilant, we have to remain firm, and we have to remain resolute that Bermudians
will come first with the America’s Cup.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you . Thank you, Honourable
Member.
Any other Honourable Member care to speak?
Then the Chair recognises Dr. Gibbons again.

Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the support shown
by the Opposition and I am also pleased that the
Honourable Member Jamahl Simmons was able to get a first -hand perspective out in Chicago. I think he got
a real sense of the excitement and the dra w that this
kind of event can produce. Bermuda got, as I think he would have been first -hand witness of, tremendous
exposure out there, and I think if we are guilty of an ything it is probably perhaps not adequately communi-cating the benefits of this.
I think the country got a better perspective after the October World Series Event last year. The ef-forts by both the ACBDA and the Bermuda Economic
Development Corporation, the Small Business Group,
the number of small merchants that were involved in that (I th ink close to 60), the numbers that have been
involved even up at Dockyard with the Foil Fest that
was up there the other day, which was an entirely sort
of charitable exercise by some of the teams and by the ACBDA putting it on to get more community i nvolvement —I think all those things are starting to,
perhaps, break down some of the perceptions.
It was interesting when I was out in Chicago
and speaking to one of the d eputy mayors out there
whose title actually involves economic development, he was saying t hat although Chicago put in a bid for
the America’s Cup, and I think they were down to one out of four in the subsequent rounds of elimination as
to who would host, he said it was difficult for the
Mayor’s office to actually support the bid because he
said it was all seen as an issue, at least in some quarters, as involving rich guys with toys. But he said in the end they were very , very disappointed and partic ularly he was very disappointed because, as I said ear-lier, Chicago depends a lot on tourism for i ts economic
driver and he said the extraordinary visibility provided by the America’s Cup was something that he felt very disappointed about in not being able to host.
As the Honourable Member will know (who
just spoke) they had an aggregate of something l ike
200,000 people watching out there and the number of TV views and others was quite extraordinary.
The Honourable Member is quite right, the
Endeavour Sailing Programme has touched over
1,000 students at this particular point. They do not
look like me by and large, and it has also gotten a lot
of sailing clubs involved in the process as well.
So as far as the sponsorship is concerned, I
do not believe Gibbon’s Company is a sponsor. We
were not able to come up with the, shall we say, the appropriate sponsorship fee as other companies

B ermuda House of Assembly have, but I think that was a decision by the America’s
Cup Event Authority who chooses their sponsors on
the basis of bids that come in. And , unfortunately , in
that case we missed out. But suffice it to say , that I
think a lot have benefitted, a lot of landlords have benefitted, particularly up in the West End, and I think slowly —the Honourable Member was correct —I think
slowly the community is beginning to understand that this is really putting Bermuda centre on the world stage. It should be very exciting next year.
And we are getting a lot of positive benefits
out of it, not to mention the fact that I think, personally, the teams have done an extraordinary job—the
ACEA— getting into the community. People who are
now based here have really been involved in charit able work. They are in the schools with the STEAM
programme. They have made a lot of effort to int egrate themselves into the community. And I think a lot of Bermudians have neighbours that are sailors or are
associated wit h it. I think there were a couple thousand people that went to the team bases a week or so
ago. So I think slowly we are getting there, but I un-derstand that there was always the bias that this was for a certain elite sailing crowd and I think that Bermudi ans are starting to see that that is not necessarily
entirely the case.
So with that, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the
support from the Opposition and would move that the
Bill be committed.

All right. Thank you, Minister.
It has been moved by the Minister that the Bill
be committed. So I would like to ask that the Deputy please take the Chair [of Committee] .
[
Pause]
House in Committee at 4:27 pm
[
Mrs. Suzann Roberts -Holshouser, Chairman]
COMMITTEE ON BILL
AMERICA’S CUP AMENDMENT ACT 2016
Th
e Chairman: Members, we are now in Committee
of the whole House for further consideration of the Bill
entitled America’s Cup Amendment Act 2016 . I call on
the Minister in charge to proceed.
Minister, you have the floor.
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Madam
Chairman.
Madam Chairman, I am going to suggest to
you that we move clauses 1 through 6.

It has been moved that we move
clauses 1 through 6.
Are there any objections to that motion? No objections.
Please proceed.
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you.
Clause 1 basically provides for the title of the
Bill, which is the America’s Cup Amendment Act 2016.
Clause 2 amends section 6 of the principal
Act, which refers to customs duty. Subsection (4) is
amended to introduce revised modifications to CPC 5022 in the Sixth Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act 1970 in relation to goods imported by the America’s Cup Event Authority or any of its designated commercial partners, a Team or any of its designated commercial partners, a Regatta Official, or any person
importing for the sole purpose of supply to such per-sons.
Clause 3 inserts new section 10A of the principal Act which provides that land tax shall not be
charged, levied, or collected in respect of any valu ation unit with a commercial end- use which is leased by
ACBDA from the West End Development Corporation solely for the purposes of the America’s Cup.
Clause 4 amends Schedule 1 to the principal
Act by adding new protected words.
Clause 5 amends Schedule 2 to the principal
Act by adding new protected emblems as set out in the Schedule to the Bill.
Clause 6 is the commencement and provides
for the commencement of the Bill.
Thank you, Madam Chairman.

We will move clauses 1 through 6
first.
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Okay, sorry.
I move clauses 1 through 6 as printed.
2342 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly The Chairman: It has been moved that clauses 1
through 6 be approved as printed.
Are there any objections to that motion?
No objections.
Agreed to.

[Gavel]
[Motion carried: Clauses 1 through 6 passed.]

It has been moved that the Bill be
reported to the House as printed.
Are there any objections to that motion?
No objections.
Agreed to.
[Gavel]
[Motion carried: The America’s Cup Amendment Act
2016 was considered by a Com mittee of the whole
House and passed without amendment.]

[Pause]

House resumed at 4:33 pm

[Hon. K. H. Randolph Horton, Speaker, in the Chair]

REPORT OF COMMITTEE

AMERICA’S CUP AMENDMENT ACT 2016

Carried over? Okay.
And Orders 15 and 16 are also carried over.
I would like to recognise now the Minister for
Finance.
Minister Bob Richards, y ou have the floor.

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21

Hon. E. T. (Bob) Richards: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I move that Standing Order 21 be suspended
to enable me to move that the Bill entitled Investment
Funds Amendment Act 2016 be now read a third time by its title only.

The Chair will now recognise the Mini ster for Economic Development , Dr. Grant Gibbons.

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 21
Dr. the Hon. E. Grant Gibbons: Thank you, Mr.
Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I move that S tanding Order 21
be suspended to enable me to move that the Bill ent itled America’s Cup Amendment Act 2016 be now read
the third time by its title only.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, in my preparation for my presentation today, I found that I have drafted multiple
speeches to try and get the right balance. I received a few calls from individuals that I hold in high regard last
night, and the theme and advice to me was to be
measured. That is what I wil l attempt to do.
But I have to tell you that the first draft was
way too harsh, so I had to dispose of that. The second draft was way too emotional, so I put that aside. And
then I decided to do something, Mr. Speaker, that I
believe that I need to do a bi t more often, and that is I
said a prayer. And when I said the prayer, Mr.
Speaker, the answer that came back was, just tell the
truth and the truth shall set you free.
And so, Mr. Speaker, the creation of the One
Bermuda Alliance was my idea, and that is what
makes today a bit more difficult for me. Merging of the Bermuda Democratic Alliance with the United Bermuda Party, Mr. Speaker, was an idea that I had, and
I shared it with my BDA colleagues, including my very good friend the L earned Member , Mark Pett ingill, next
to me here. And I will tell you, Mr. Speaker, it took me
one year to convince my colleagues it was a good
2344 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly idea. And then once we got to that stage, and it was
after the by -election that was caused by the retirement
of Dr. Ewart Brown, and the BDA’s quality candidate
came third, and they realised the efficacy of the
merger made sense. And then it took us one year to negotiate the merger.
And Mr. Speaker, I took the idea to the Honourable Premier , Michael Dunkley, who has been my
friend for many years, which also makes today very
difficult, and we thought that it was something we could do, and it took us a year to negotiate the crea-tion of the OBA.
And the merger, Mr. Speaker, if you look at
the name—One Bermuda Alliance—alliance is a nother name f or coalition. So the recent discussions
that have been had, and comments I have made about my interest and my desire of forming a coalition government , is nothing new for me, Mr. Speaker.
The formation of the OBA was just that, it was
a coalition. It was a coalition of the BDA, which repr esented a progressive and grass -roots political ph ilosophy —young people, new people, into politics —
with the United Bermuda Party, which represented experience and a fiscal conservative political philos ophy.
And the challeng e that I had, Mr. Speaker,
because let us not forget that in 2009 I resigned from the then- UBP, and I resigned from the UBP because
despite the fact that I shared a conservative fiscal approach, the United Bermuda Party, Mr. Speaker, fell
out of touch with the people of this country. And they
did not get the majority of the electorate. And I had a
challenge with that, and that was part of the reason
why I resigned.
And so when we created this One Bermuda
Alliance, Mr. Speaker, the vision was for the new OBA
to allow the philosophy and the vision of the BDA to dominate, Mr. Speaker, the new party, because that is
what was fresh, that is what was attractive to the electorate, and have that blend and it is a coalition, a coopting of two organisations. And the plan and the v ision were to grow as a grass -roots party.
And so, Mr. Speaker, what has happened is,
instead of the OBA reflecting the vision of the BDA, particularly under the current leadership, Mr. Speaker,
the OBA has embraced the philosophy and the met hodology, Mr. Speaker, of the UBP —a philosophy of
my way is the right way , Mr. Speaker. And it has go verned in a way that clearly . . . and we have seen this
in the last two years in particular, where there is a di sconnect with the people of this country. And not ne cessarily because of the decisions that have been
made, because there have been difficult decisions,
and decisions that had to be made to move this country in the right direction.
This Government inherited difficult situations,
particularly when we talk about the economy. So we had some tough decisions. And I have always said
that difficult decisions will attract criticism, because no one likes to deal with difficult decisions. But som etimes it is not what you do, Mr. Speaker, it is how you do it. And so we have had a methodology of arr ogance, Mr. Speaker, coming from this Government —
my way is the right way , Mr. Speaker. And that is why
we have had all of the protests that we have seen in
the past three years, which have been unprecedented
in number, not just the frequency of them, but the
amount of individuals that were protesting , because of
the methodology and the disconnect.
Because the fact of the matter, Mr. Speaker,
is that in 2012 the people of this country did not vote
for the United Bermuda Party. The people of this
country voted for the One Bermuda Alliance . And they
saw something new, something fresh. And they
thought they were getting a different vision.
But what they have received, Mr. Speaker, is
the UBP. And if the One Bermuda Allianc e Gover nment do not make the necessary adjustments, you
have to remember, Mr. Speaker, the United Bermuda
Party lost three consecutive elections for a reason.
And had we not merged, had we not created the One
Bermuda Alliance, had we not brought in the fresh, new ideas and faces and visions, and philosophy of
doing things, we would not have won 2012. We would
not have won.
And so I was very proud of the fact that I had
a significant hand in it . Not just myself, it was other
members, my honourable and learne d friend , Mark
Pettingill, was involved in that, and many others that
sit in this C hamber . The former Premier Craig Cannonier played a pivotal role in that, Mr. Speaker. But
we forfeited our position and, in my view, under mi sguided leadership, we have gon e back to the very
thing that I left, Mr. Speaker, in 2009.
Now, I am not going to rehash the unfortunate
events surrounding the immigration protest, Mr.
Speaker . But let me say that was the event that culminated in my resignation from the Cabinet, because I
had consistently failed in having the council I was pr oviding, and not just myself (this is not about me) , but
today I have to explain why I am taking the decision
that I have taken.
Because time and time again when those of
us who were trying to advise the Government on a
certain course of action, and time and time again that
old UBP methodology and philosophy would prevail,
and time and time again we would get the same r esults, and I was frustrated with that. I was not just
there to be window dressing, Mr. Speaker. I expected
to be there to have influence and bring the philosophy
that I embraced, and others, and have that make an
impact on the policies and on the direction of the
Government.
So when I resigned, I offered an olive branch,
Mr. Speaker, because on the day that I resigned, and
I shared this with my parliamentary colleagues, my
heart and my spirit and my conscience wanted to go Independent then, on that day . But I resisted it and I


Bermuda House of Assembly offered an olive branch that I would stay. We had a
budget looming. The Finance Minister has enough
burden to bear. We had to get the budget passed, and
I did not want to cause any more confusion. And I certainly did not want to destabilise the Government at
that time, and so I said I would stay. And I expected that the olive branch would have been appreciated
and, even in many respects, reciprocated in treatment towards me as a colleague.
I went back into private legal practice, and I
have to say that I was quite pleased that I immediately was able to acquire a respectable volume of clients. And quite a large, probably about 60 per cent of my
clientele, Mr. Speaker, had issues against the Go vernment, whether it was a wrongful dismissal from a
government department, whether it was an application
to the Liquor Licensing Authority, whether it was ap-pealing a decision of the Chief Immigration Officer .
The largest entity in this country is the G overnment .
The largest employer in this country is the G overnment. There is going to be a plethora of legal disputes
against the G overnment.
And so they came to me and they sought my
assistance . And I have to tell you that I acted for these
individuals . And to my astonishment, Mr. Speaker, I
received a letter from the Attorney General, and I will
not get into the details of the letter, because that is client privilege, Mr. Speaker, at this stage. But I r eceived a letter from the Attorney General which i nstructed me that because the Honou rable and
Learned Member , Mark Pettingill , was a former Attorney General of this country, that he a nd I, and anyone
else that worked at the firm, were prevented from representing any client against the G overnment —
completely and totally absurd. Unheard of.
Of all of the former Attorney s General that we
have had in this country that have represented clients against the Government . . . as a matter of fact Mr.
Speaker, my honourable and learned business par tner is a well -known, highly respected litigator, that has
litigated up to the Privy Council multiple times. If this
instruction is to be followed it wil l completely paralyse
his practice and destroy at least 60 per cent of mine.
I was astonished that as a former colleague of
the Cabinet I would be told that I cannot freely practice my profession in my country. That is economic,
Mr. Speaker, intimidation.
Mr. Speaker, there is a report in today’s Royal
Gazette , in relation to an immigration raid on my
home. Again, I am not going to get into the details of this because there are individuals that I do not want to
expose, including the company that I hired two years
ago. Two years ago I hired this company , on the referral of a very prominent family, to clean my house. And
they been cleaning my house and doing a fantastic
job, Mr. Speaker, for two years. Not one complaint. Stellar job. Come once a week for four hours, once a
week . I had no issue. The primary cleaner I know is married to a
Bermudian, and has children from a Bermudian. Now I do not know everyone that came to my house . But I
can tell you that . . . because, of course, during the
day I am at work, but I did find out that there was a
directive, Mr. Speaker, because of some suspicion
that the company may have had an illegal worker on
their staff . There was a directive to apprehend this
illegal worker at my house. And I had three immigr ation officers co me to my house and thoroughly search
my house— a former Minister of the Government, Mr.
Speaker.

[Inaudible interjections ]

[Gavel]

And so I view . . . I hear
people speaking. And I do not know if they have a
problem with it . This is the truth. And if you cannot
deal with the truth, then I am sorry, Mr. Speaker, but
this is what happened to me. These are facts. And I
have a responsibility to my constituents and to the people of this country to explain why I am taking to my
feet today . Okay?
When I hear d Dr. Brown in his press conference say , Why are they going after him? And he says,
Because when a black man stands up to the esta blishment, they come after you. Well, I can say, you
know what Mr. Speaker ? I am living it. I am living it,
Mr. Speaker.

[Desk thumping]

When my uncles told me
stories when I was growing up about how if you went
up against the establishment you could get your mor tgage pulled . . . I used to hear those stories, Mr.
Speaker . And I use d to think it was an exaggeration.
Well, I do not anymore, Mr. Speaker, because I am a
former colleague and this is happening to me, Mr.
Speaker. So what can I do when you have this level of
mistrust?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
And so, Mr. Speaker, this is not an ambush. I
have met with the Premier. I have expressed my concerns with him. I met with him shortly after this inc ident. I met with him after I received this letter. And I have t o say, to date, I have not received any satisfactory response. But I am expected to just be quiet and
carry on. Well , that is just not my personality, Mr.
Speaker.
And so I feel that it has now become unwor kable for me to remain in this organisation. I wil l stand
in this Honourable House as an Independent Member.
2346 1 July 2016 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda House of As sembly I will continue to discharge my duty the way I have
always done.
I can stand on my record in this Honourable
House, Mr. Speaker. I come every week, prepared,
Mr. Speaker. There are probably more words and Hansard attributable to me than most , because I come
every week and I discharge my duty, Mr. Speaker, in
this House and I will continue to do so, and work hard.
And I am not closed to working for this Government,
because there are good people in th is Government,
Mr. Speaker. But there are some, Mr. Speaker, who
cannot shake that old UBP way. And Mr. Speaker, for that, I have to resign.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[Desk thumping]