Vexed Bermoothes

Government reports that the 2010 census has so far managed to collect data on less than 30% of households, saying that many residents are hesitant to answer the census questions.

It’s no surprise:  this year’s Bermuda census includes a whopping list of sensitive personal questions ranging from pay levels to education to health conditions … and even branching off into weird categories such as use of alternative energy.  Simply put:  many people do not trust our Government to have this much detail of their lives in one place.

By comparison, the US census (also taking place this year) contains only 10 basic questions dealing with number of persons in the household, home ownership, age, race, and national origin.  This encourages people to promptly submit the information – and ensures that Government can quickly tabulate it.

The Bermuda Sun points out that the three contenders to become Premier are all, to one degree or another, seeking to define themselves as the “un-Ewart”.

Under his leadership, Mr. Lister declared, we will be “dusting off the welcome mat and starting over”.

Ms. Cox declared: “What the country needs is someone who is going to help heal some of the divisions … We need to talk about hot issues without a lot of the drama.”

Mr. Butler, meanwhile, vowed to build a Bermuda “where everyone is included” …

But the important point is this: All three candidates clearly and unequivocally identified the key failing of the last administration was one of tone: It failed to consult, to respect, or even appear to like, a huge proportion of the people it was meant to serve.

It confused firm and decisive government for government that was often stubborn and rude. Critics often became enemies or racists, rather than fellow-Bermudians who deserved to be reasoned with.

Yup.  Once they have established their unEwartness, I hope they will talk about how to deal with Bermuda’s financial problems (aka realigning Government’s expenditures with its revenues).

Sorry for the paucity of postings.  Dog days of summer and all.  Plus, I’m beyond vexed; I’m sad for Bermuda.

Here’s my opinion:  huge resources have been applied to “package” Dr. Brown as a successful leader … both to Bermudians but even more to his social circles in the United States.  I believe that many decisions and expenditures have little to do with Bermuda’s prosperity, and everything to do with the Premier’s personal ambitions.

Successful?  Look at the facts:

• Our community is more divided- and ANGRY – than in decades.  In so many of his actions and appointments, one has to ask “is the Premier so out of touch with Bermuda, or did he intend to be divisive?”
  
• Our economy is a mess.  Our reputation is tattered.
  
• Government expenditures are a mess.  The swollen civil service is adrift.
• The public education system remains a blight on the lives of many young people.
  
• We have in a few short years acquired a crippling national debt – with little to show for it.
  
• So far in 2010 in Bermuda, seven people have been murdered and at least 19 people wounded.  Wow.
  

No spin can override these facts.  In my opinion, Dr. Brown is a failed leader whose tenure has been a disaster for Bermuda.

In my view, under Dr. Brown’s leadership, both the PLP and Bermuda have been badly damaged.  Our collective future has been threatened.

So, I hope the Doc’s next trough is deep and far far away.  Now, it’s time to clean house.

The problem with the PLP’s management of Bermuda’s finances is that eventually you run out of other people’s money.

I have great difficulty getting excited about Paula Cox as a potential Premier, as she has been an integral part of Bermuda’s unsustainable profligacy over the past few years.

The list of scandals during Dr. Brown’s great destructathon is so long that it’s hard to keep up.  They even overlap so that one event is eclipsed by the next, and I fear that the damage wrought on Bermuda’s community and economy will rattle on for years.

One of the early controversial events was the famous lunch for the Premier in the US which many alleged was a “pay to play” fundraiser held for investment managers interested in doing business with the Bermudian pension system.  The murkiness surrounding the event helped define the “unethical but possibly not illegal” phrase that we’ve gotten so used to hearing.

Well, here’s some clarity on the matter.  The American SEC has firmly banned “pay to play”.  It is illegal.

SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission is adopting a new rule under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 that prohibits an investment adviser from providing advisory services for compensation to a government client for two years after the adviser or certain of its executives or employees make a contribution to certain elected officials or candidates. The new rule also prohibits an adviser from providing or agreeing to provide, directly or indirectly, payment to any third party for a solicitation of advisory business from any government entity on behalf of such adviser, unless such third parties are registered broker-dealers or registered investment advisers, in each case themselves subject to pay to play restrictions. Additionally, the new rule prevents an adviser from soliciting from others, or coordinating, contributions to certain elected officials or candidates or payments to political parties where the adviser is providing or seeking government business. The Commission also is adopting rule amendments that require a registered adviser to maintain certain records of the political contributions made by the adviser or certain of its executives or employees. The new rule and rule amendments address “pay to play” practices by investment advisers.

Bermuda’s central Government is unlikely to make public the $800,000 report behind the unpopular municipalities law because, in my opinion, rather than discussing reform, it is all about the tactics of taking over Bermuda’s local governments.

You see, it would be difficult for Government simply take them over, both from a public opinion perspective and a practical perspective.  So, here’s how I see it unfolding:

1. If passed the law will cripple the Corporation of Hamilton by gutting its revenues (by removing tax base and increasing the taxes they must pay) and ability to develop its way out of the shortfall.  Currently the Corporation may define its own City limits.  Under the proposed act, that power becomes Government’s.
2. The PLP may be able to wiggle this through the House, but are less certain to get it through the more balanced Senate.  So, they have called this a “money bill” which only needs approval from the House.
3. The Corporation of Hamilton will have only two choices in its predicament:  to raise taxes or to cut services.  Either would eventually undermine its popularity.
4. The Corporation is already audited for its own purposes.  However the new Government stipulated audit will give them much information they need about the city – and will highlight the growing gap in revenues and expenditures.
5. Today the Corporation is independent.  If the proposed law is passed, it clearly makes the Corporation subordinate to a Cabinet minister who has the ability, under Section 12, to amend the Act or repeal other laws (subject to affirmative resolution).  The Minister can then use the deteriorating financial situation as cause to complete the full take over of the city.

This takeover is being couched in the usual “us vs them” rhetoric that dooms most decision making in Bermuda.  This is wrong.  Each time we allow it to happen it lets Government off the hook from acting with responsibility and accountability.  And each time, we go deeper into clutches of the Forty Thieves’ cave.

Remember the fact:  the Corporation of Hamilton proposed a broad set of reforms to Government back in 2008.  The PLP have ignored them.

Reform in Bermuda’s municipal corporations is possible without a takeover.  It is possible without the financial disruption and deepening distrust that this act will cause.  This act is, in fact, anti reform.

Bermuda today is a very divided place.

On a side note:  the international sector this week is aghast at the machinations surrounding the City as well as the intimidating emails to employers of citizens who support the City.  Another chip in the wall.

It’s a major element of the PLP arsenal of discontent:  back in the bad ole days if someone made off, the legend goes, the Forty Thieves would have their employer fire them or the bank would pull their mortgage.

Then what the hell is ImmiMin David Burch doing having letters written to local employers, quizzing the political opinions expressed by their Bermudian employees?

That’s called intimidation.  It is a completely unacceptable violation of constitutionally protected freedom of expression.

“no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his freedom of expression, and for the purposes of this sec­tion the said freedom includes freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas and information without interference”

In my opinion, it is another sign the current leadership are a reincarnation of the Forty Thieves.

The Bermuda Government and the Human Rights Commission must investigate this with alacrity – and if the claims are true, they must strongly rebuke both the Minister and the civil servant for violating these individuals’ right to free speech.