ONE of the recipients of Calvin White's e-mail about the 2003 Progressive Labour Party Annual Golf Classic decried "pay-to-play" schemes, but complained that "the assumption is, if you don't play, you don't get in". He also said that he had visited Bermuda in 2002 for a "fund-raiser" but could not remember the "party" which was the beneficiary.

Very few recipients of the May 5, 2003 e-mail would make any comment, but the common denominator among the parties described in the "pay-to-play" saga is that none of the decision makers with the power to direct business to managers or stockbrokers claim to use this power for personal advantage, and none of the money managers participating in this apparently ubiquitous scheme for cementing relationships admit that they ever paid to play.

"We don't do 'pay-to-play' at all," advised Kermit Eck, of Cooke & Bieler. "We have been in business for 50 years, and have had a very good investment record through that time period. Not only do we not do it, we don't think the business lends itself very well to it, because there are generally a lot more 'checks and balances'.

"Even if you wanted to do it, it would be a difficult thing!" insisted Mr. Eck. "As a firm, we have never made political contributions."

However, Mr. Eck went on to describe a situation which could be entirely reasonable or the most clear-cut example of "pay-to-play".

"I will say that we have never limited our partners from making political contributions, and that 's become a more sensitive issue in the last few years," Mr. Eck said.

"I would say that we are trying to figure out what our policy should be to avoid conflicts of interest, but at the same time, to allow people to support the political people they want to support. It's a tricky issue."

Asked if Cooke & Bieler would reimburse contributions by partners to politicians who could have some bearing on the awarding of business to his firm, Mr. Eck said unequivocally: "We would not do that."

Despite Mr. Eck's rebuttal, many observers believe that the business "lends itself" to "pay-to-play" all too well, and the essence of "pay-to-play" is that the companies never do the paying; the principals, marketing managers or portfolio managers pay, and according to sources, bonuses will take note of payments made. It's all done with a nod and a wink.

Mr. Eck's partner Thaddeus Fletcher was one of the recipients of Calvin White's May 2003 e-mail regarding the temporary cancellation of the 2003 Annual PLP Golf Classic, but he hasn't answered a series of calls and e-mail questions asking him whether he ever attended any PLP "fund-raiser", was asked to make a contribution to the PLP, or if he did so.

It is understood that he was an invitee to the lunch in honour of Dr. Brown in Washington DC in March, 2002, but he also failed to answer questions asking whether he attended the lunch or wrote a cheque payable to Dr. Brown.

Another of the recipients of Mr. White's e-mail said that he could not remember knowing Calvin White or receiving the e-mail, and is certain that he took no part in any PLP fund-raiser in 2003 or subsequently.

However, he did remember an earlier event in Bermuda, and he was scathing about the nature of "pay-to-play" and its effect on the money management industry.

"I was down there one time, I think in 2002, at the request of our marketing person," said the source. "It was a fund-raiser, but I don't recall which party it was."

The source said that he had read a number of articles on the subject in the Mid-Ocean News, and said it was long overdue that his industry came to grips with "pay-to-play" schemes.

"The cleaner this business is, the better for all of us. In this business, you may be the better person, but the assumption is that if you don't pay, you don't get in. A number of the managers in that (White) e-mail have done a lot of business with FIS in the past."

A spokesman for American Express said that Ms Char Guddal, one of seven recipients of the White e-mail who worked for that company, had informed him of questions asking whether she had ever taken part in PLP fund-raisers or made contributions to the Party.

"The Government of Bermuda is no longer a client of American Express as a management group as of 2004, and we have not made any contributions to the PLP," he said.

He was unable to comment on the likelihood that individual American Express marketing personnel or portfolio managers may have made contributions, and declined to make any general comment about "pay-to-play".

He said that he would attempt to find out if any of the individual employees would answer e-mail questions about contributions to the PLP, but did not respond by press time.

A spokeswoman for another global money manager, five of whose employees received the White e-mail, requested anonymity to say that none of the five "had any recollection of any such invitation, or attendance at any such event. It may be something that was just e-mailed at random and went unnoticed. It's something people here aren't aware of; they may have received an e-mail, but in the greater scheme of what they do, receiving such e-mails on a daily basis, it just came and went."

Asked whether she really meant that employees got invitations to take part in events set up by public pension fund managers on a daily basis, the spokeswoman refused to elaborate. She would not identify the person currently managing the Bermuda PFIC account or allow direct communication with any of the recipients of the e-mail. She would make no comment, on or off the record, about the role of "pay-to-play" in the industry.

"We like to pick and choose the things we talk about," she concluded, in something of an under-statement.

Another fund management recipient of the White e-mail, asked whether he had ever known Mr.White, been invited to a PLP event, or made any contribution to the PLP, responded: "No, not at all. I don't know Mr. White at all. I have never been to Bermuda."

A colleague of his, who was also sent the e-mail, said that she too had no memory of any such e-mail, or of making any contribution to the PLP, but she was the only one of many who allowed that she may have met Mr. White, "once, a long time ago".

A mystery remains; in his e-mail, addressed to "dear colleagues", Mr. White wrote that he "appreciated the positive responses received in respect of this tournament", but none of the recipients we were able to contact would concede that they had given any response, or had any knowledge of Mr. White.

By press time, Mr. White had not responded to a question asking him how many positive responses he had received.

Opposition Leader Grant Gibbons intends to propose a legislative change, mimicking recent legislation enacted in the state of Louisiana.

"Consultants and money managers shall provide full disclosure to public retirement or pension plan sponsors of conflicts of interest, including non-pension sponsor sources of revenue," reads the pertinent clause.

"Consultants also shall provide full disclosure of any payments they receive from money managers, in hard or soft dollars, for any services they provide, including but not limited to performance measurement, business consulting and education."