LEASE, Mr. Editor, do not get me wrong on this: we on our side of the House did not stay up all night and into the next morning to help the Progressive Labour Party justify those proposed increases in pay, although on reflection I think an argument can be made for hardship pay for those members who actually stayed from beginning to end.

There were some 20 of us in total, I think, seven from our side, 12 from theirs and the Speaker, who actually stuck it out from ten o'clock Friday morning until 6.30 the next, taking only the usual hour and a half for lunch.

That, sir, was 19 long hours in total, the majority of those hours, 13 or so, spent on a Government take note motion which required no vote.

So what gives, Mr. Editor? (Spare me the wisecracks too, about how next time we should meet in a different House on a different Hill . . . in Devonshire.)

First off, there was the motion itself, the self-congratulatory sort, put down some time ago by PLP backbencher Glenn Blakeney:

"That this Honourable House takes note of the Government's tenure of seven successive years of economic growth and our key social policy objectives, such as affordable housing and youth development ? all geared to sustain and empower Bermuda's people."

Take note, indeed.

They obviously wanted to engage us in debate on how great they are and on the great things which they think they have done for Bermuda and, we think, for themselves ? and there was the rub, Mr. Editor.

Meanwhile, reporters for who also endured the overnight sitting; double overtime you think? ? speculated in their dispatches that the PLP motion had a pre-election platform feel to it.

Maybe so.

But what really got our goat wasn't just the motion but the fact that MP Blakeney was allowed to lead off the debate by reading from a prepared speech.

The practice is plainly contrary to the Rules.

Rule 21(3) reads:

"Except for the statement in support of the Estimates of Revenue and Expenditure, the Statement in reply thereto and any statement under Rule 8 (1) (k) [Ministerial Statements, a Member shall not read his speech, but he may, with the consent of the Speaker read extracts from books, papers, including newspapers, in support of his argument or may refresh his memory from notes."

The point of order was taken early on when it became clear that MP Blakeney was reading word for word from prepared type-written text.

The point was not upheld.

Instead, the Speaker ruled that the PLP MP could continue to refer to what the Speaker called "his notes".

Some notes.

We all watched as he read word for word, page by page, from a typed script in a three-ring binder, while his colleagues ? and the Speaker ? followed along with copies of the 50-plus page document which, for all we know, was prepared for him by someone else, swivel servant or party hack or both, we don't know.

The pity was that he didn't read it like it was Hott. Instead it took him over two hours to read through the prepared presentation which purported to recount in excruciating, but plainly partisan detail, all the great and wonderful things which the PLP claimed to have happened under their watch and as a result of their policies.

They didn't take credit for the sun coming up each day in the east and setting in the west, but they came close.

Of course, there was no mention of the failures and the disasters during their watch.

It fell to the Opposition to take them on, on their track record, and take them on we did from dusk to dawn. Frankly, Mr. Editor, there was no holding us back. They and the listening public were reminded of not just the opportunities but the money they have squandered through the Bermuda Housing Corporation (and the $8 to $10 million written off there) and with the Berkeley school construction project (the $50-million overspend, and counting); not to mention the general fiscal mismanagement which has been highlighted by the Auditor General in his reports during their tenure, like the Coco Reef lease fiasco, credit card spending, and the most recent challenge of not being able to account for $800 million in spending, to name but a choice few.

For seven successive years, money from taxpayers has been rolling in and the PLP have been spending it like it's nobody's business, but their own. Literally.

Government is growing at a record pace. There were 4,736 civil servants in their employ six years ago. They are projecting a total of 5,357 for this year.

But apparently that number still isn't enough.

The PLP have taken to hiring consultants, big-time. They spent $35 million on professional services (Budget-speak for consultants, mostly) six years ago and this year's Budget projects $66 million. Almost double ? and in six years, no less.

What they spend on "communications" (getting their message across, we suppose) is the same old story: the vote was $4.3 million in their first full year in power and this year they are expecting to spend $13.66 million.

Travel is no exception either: $3.1 million was spent on travel in the fiscal year 1999/2000, the PLP's first full year in power, and for this their seventh successive year they are projecting up to $11.883 million ? or almost $1-million per month. That's growth, Mr. Editor, but not the sort they want us to talk about or the public to notice.

Meanwhile, the Premier and the Colonel have been busy justifying their most recent persecution of the Auditor General on the grounds that Government is spending $12 million a year on office rentals, and they need to cut back, to effect a savings for the taxpayer.

Yeah, right. Well, here's a suggestion then: Put the Colonel in charge of Ministerial travel.

We all remember, too, when the PLP first came to power when one of their first, more visible acts was the purchase of sporty new GP cars for Ministers, and last week seven years on their most recent act was pushing through whopping big increases in salaries for the same Ministers.

OK, so maybe there has been seven successive years of modest economic growth in Bermuda while the PLP have been in power, but the people know who has been doing the best . . . for themselves.

Hear, hear

OOPS! They did it again, Mr. Editor. More legislation came back from the Senate for correction: this time the amendments to the Bermuda Housing Corporation Act. You may recall the fun I had when I questioned whether Government really intended the BHC to have the power to grant mortgages as well as leases for up to 120 years.

We were thinking that maybe they had finally found a way to break the back of the affordable housing crisis. Turns out we were right in thinking that it was just a mistake. Government only wanted the BHC to have the power to grant leases for up to 120 years. Mortgages are still only going to be granted for up to 35 years. I can only presume that the acoustics are better in the Senate. Government doesn't seem to hear us as well in the House on the Hill.

Molasses up the Hill

EARLY election or not, Mr. Editor, the quantity of legislation is not strained but rather seems to move up to the Hill like molasses. Three new pieces were tabled Friday, finally, but hardly enough to fill the agenda for the next couple of weeks. What we now have are:

l which will provide for ticketing for various marine offences (and this when there are apparently still problems enforcing and collecting on parking tickets).

l which will see the introduction of commercial and recreational fishing licences and change the definition of "fish" to include ? and careful with the spelling here ? "organisms"; and

l which seeks to provide protection for ? you guessed it ? certain species of endangered wild animals and plants but not people.

Precedent and practice requires that they remain on the order paper for two weeks before they are taken up. There is only one other eligible piece and that is a Bill to increase penalties for sexual assaults and related offences.

It should make for a shorter days for the next couple of weeks unless . . . for the second week in a row, MP Blakeney takes up another one of his self-congratulatory motions, this one on the PLP's efforts to encourage and expand competition in Bermuda.

But here's hoping we don't suffer another repeat performance so soon after the first.

Minister's fare deal

RAIN, Mr. Editor, apparently dampened whatever protest taxi drivers may have had in mind when Government proceeded with legislation to pave the way for limousine service. Rain means more business in the taxi industry. What remains to be seen is whether the introduction of limousines will mean less business for taxi drivers who are still reeling from the introduction and extra cost of GPS.

According to the Minister, there is provision for up to 100 new limousine cars ? the use of any other vehicle currently on the road is prohibited ? and as well limousine operators will be permitted to set their own rates.

What's also startling is that the Minister is expecting taxi permit holders to take up some of the new limousine permits. The legislation allows them to trade in their taxi permit for a limousine permit, providing they meet the qualifications. This would mean giving up a permit ? and a cab, if you couldn't sell it ? worth anywhere from $150,000 to $175,000, and this for a limousine permit for which they will also have to purchase a new vehicle estimated to cost around $100,000.

Why would they do that?

Because a limousine permit is projected to be worth $250,000, according to Minister Dr. Ewart Brown

New arithmetic I guess, Mr. Editor, in the New Bermuda.

However, for taxi operators to qualify for this fare deal they have to be one of the first 50 applicants for limousine permits.

It sounds to me like taxi drivers are still paying the price for resisting the Minister and GPS.

He wins. They lose.

Government got the limousine legislation through the House over Opposition objections, 17 for, 12 against.

A last laugh

SPEAKING of GPS, Mr. Editor, readers may enjoy these exchanges during the debate:

Opposition Leader Wayne Furbert queried why a new category of vehicle, i.e. limousine, was needed at all.

"They are going to do exactly what a taxi does now," he said.

Interjected an exasperated Dr. Brown: "And so does a horse and buggy."

"True," came back Michael Dunkley, "but you don't make them have GPS."

A little later, the Minister complained that GPS had only been in effect for 120 days and he was unable to furnish any information on what data had so far been collected.

"One hundred and 20 days just isn't sufficient enough time," he said.

Not so, according to Maxwell Burgess: "You forget, Doc, the world was made in seven."