Wrong impression given by issue’s complexities
I did take note of the op-ed recently written by Justin Mathias, who is chairman of the Future Bermuda Alliance, which is the youth division of the One Bermuda Alliance. I just wish to have the opportunity to set the record straight, as his op-ed did contain an inaccuracy, as it related to Friday’s debate in the House.
First, I would like to welcome Mr Mathias to the political fray. As the first male of African descent to attend an historically white private school, Mount Saint Agnes in 1963, it is good to see a younger person of colour in the presence of this MSA graduate throw his hat into the fray.
As to his op-ed, I just wish to note that, contrary to his assertion during the question period, the question I indeed asked was not from a prepared list of questions.
If I am guilty of anything, it is not because the question was not “coherent” as he characterised it, but rather because it may have been fraught with too much complexity for its own good.
I simply was seeking to convey that the outcome as it relates to the airport deal was one that led to the privatisation of a public asset and thus the privatisation of profits — its revenues, less costs — which represents a significant transfer of wealth from our government into private hands.
As a consequence, as invariably happens in these types of privatisation deals, it can often result in the socialising of losses, which we all collectively bear. In this case, it is represented by the Government having to pay a significant cost to move and now house the post office facility on an annual basis.
In addition, there are the other significant costs such as the loss of revenue generated by the airport, which now accrues to the private entity known as Aecon.
ROLFE PATTON COMMISSIONG
Simons resigns from Preserve Marriage
Workers down tools at Hamilton Docks
MM&I responds to Special Report
Lead stage role for star Herbert
Shoe store relocates to Court Street
Take Our Poll