Planning files relating to a proposed new cruise ship terminal at Dockyard reveal evidence of Government's "contempt for due process," the Opposition has claimed.

Shadow Minister for the Environment Cole Simons says he has discovered evidence of the Government "steamrolling the project over the protests of its own officials".

However, Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of Tourism and Transport Marc Telemaque last night labelled the claims untrue, saying that permission for the second cruise ship pier at Dockyard has not been granted.

Concerns from former Premier Dame Jennifer Smith have already been reported in relation to the new berth for Panamax megaships.

Dame Jennifer, the chairman of the Historic Wrecks Society, has written to the Department of Tourism and Transport urging more research due to the presence of what she refers to as a "historic wreck" directly beneath the site.

She requested developers carry out an archaeological survey so dredging and piling work and subsequent ship movement does not damage the iron vessel, thought to be one of the original tug boats used to build the Royal Naval Dockyard.

It has been reported by the Mid-Ocean News that Phase Two of the construction of the new pier - which includes a new ground transportation area - cannot go ahead unless the wreck is moved. That newspaper has reported that construction has been pressing ahead since a survey states that the wreck does not affect the current Phase One of the project.

Last night, Mr. Simons claimed he has seen an email in the Planning file from Mr. Telemaque acknowledging a gap between Planning requirements and the content of an Environmental Impact Statement. According to Mr. Simons, it states: "We simply can't brook any further delays (in the project) for whatever reason." The Shadow Minister said in his opinion, "there is no statement that better conveys this Government's disdain for due process".

Mr. Simons also highlighted quotes he said are in the planning file from the Planning Department's technical officers. These include references to "extreme concern" over the approach adopted in the planning application for Phase One of the pier, and to a "dangerous precedent" Government is setting in ignoring the globally accepted rationale for Environmental Impact Statements," according to the Shadow Minister. He also claimed: "We learn that the environmental statement for the Dockyard project concerns only its construction and not the impact of its operation as a cruise ship terminal, and we learn about the inadequacies, the "lack of effort" and "limited fieldwork" in the contractor's environmental work."

Mr. Simons commented: "Throughout the Planning file, one is struck by Government officials playing catch-up with a project already underway."

However, Mr. Telemaque refuted the allegations, telling The Royal Gazette: "Planning permission for the work on the second cruise pier at Dockyard has not been granted. The work that has been done to date has been done with the full knowledge of the Department of Planning and the Department of Environmental Protection."

He listed measures taken to mitigate the impact of the work as including testing to ensure there are no ill effects on the dolphin population at Dolphin Quest. He also pointed to the driving of test piles, which are a requirement and condition of such a project.

"As recently as last week test piles were driven at the request of the Department of Planning so that the process could be photographed and the effects on the marine environment observed, recorded and made to form part of the Environmental Impact Study," he said. "That document has been through several drafts and that process has been conducted in close consultation with the Department of Planning whose technical officers along with the project managers and Bermuda Water Consultants have met regularly to discuss and address issues presented by the project. The Department of Planning has set a series of criteria the preparatory documents for the project must address to ensure that as full a picture as is required will be produced for the consideration of the Development Applications Board. Any contention of steamrolling, or otherwise ignoring processes, rules and procedures is untrue."