At the risk of turning The Royal Gazette’s page 4 into a game of ping pong between myself and columnist Walton Brown, his recent “Open Letter” to me in response to my column entitled “Immigration Policy Threatens Economic Recovery” brought to mind the old adage that “there are none so blind as those who will not see”.In his rebuttal Mr. Brown holds to his “view that the global recession has had a far greater negative impact on Bermuda’s finances than any decision by government; this has been the case everywhere else and it defies logic to ignore this.”This however was not his original view which was that “It is without question that the global economic crisis has more significantly weakened our economy than anything done locally by this Government.” The key words being “without question.”In reply I posed six logical questions, any of which at the bare minimum demonstrated that the issue certainly is not without question, although judging by Mr. Brown’s failure to address them, he is certainly without answers to them.Additionally, this has not “been the case everywhere”. Let’s take Switzerland for example, which is also not coincidentally one of the beneficiaries of Bermuda’s financial services jobs exodus, and has seen far less impact from the PLP’s “global recession” mantra.Switzerland briefly dipped into a slight recession in 2009 for four quarters, but quickly reversed and has seen GDP growth again in 2010 and 2011. The Swiss (re)insurance sector in particular is growing unlike ours, which is contracting. Their growth is not coincidentally driven by jobs, capital and company inflows from Bermuda. It is noteworthy that Switzerland’s immigration policy and attitude towards intellectual capital is the complete opposite of Bermuda’s. Ireland’s (re)insurance sector is one of the few bright spots in their troubled economy.It is not unreasonable to conclude then that Bermuda could have been similarly largely insulated from the impact of the global recession had the PLP Government not destabilized the workforce of the companies which chose Bermuda as their homes prior to the introduction of term limits. Not to mention squandering the huge budget surpluses from the boom years they inherited. PLP policy has dramatically deepened our economic crisis.Mr. Brown goes on to state that I could have “pointed out that during this same period reinsurance companies were increasingly concerned about the cost of doing business in Bermuda, the presence of a “soft” reinsurance market on premiums and the negative consequences for growth and pressure to re-domicile for tax reasons. You know this since you work in the field.”Here’s what I do know from working in the field: Switzerland is no cheaper, and arguably more costly, a place to conduct business and live than Bermuda. Its workforce, however, is much more stable.Secondly, the “soft” (re)insurance market has no bearing whatsoever on re-domiciling. Zero. If it did companies would be constantly re-domiciling. Soft markets have always existed, however during previous soft markets companies were re-domiciling to Bermuda not from it to participate in our growing market.It does not matter whether your management sits in Switzerland, Ireland or Bermuda, the business you are competing for is offered to you at the same price and generates similar margins.Thirdly, I did address “tax reasons” when I wrote the following:“The lack of a US tax treaty with Bermuda certainly is one factor, but those of us in the local financial services industry watched from the inside as companies accelerated their Plan B’s in direct response to the PLP’s term limits policy, anti-International Business rhetoric and general unwelcoming tone.”With respect to term limits, Mr. Brown states that “the revised term limit policy was developed in tandem with extensive consultations with the leadership in your industry and others: the Association of Bermuda Insurers and Reinsurers, Association of Bermuda International companies, Business Bermuda and Bermuda First.”I suppose if you call being included in part of the conversation consultation, then yes. But if anyone thinks those organisations supported the outcome, other than that it was better than nothing, they also probably think that the cruise ship terminal came in on budget. This public silence is also affirmation that business leaders understand that it is not their place to ‘dictate’ policy to the Bermuda Government as Mr. Brown suggests, even policies that are obviously bad for Bermuda and Bermudians like term limits.Mr. Brown goes on to state that “there has been no public opposition to the new term limit policy from the leaders of the “intellectual capital” you speak of. In my frank discussions with two leaders of Class Four insurers and a major local service provider, their categorical view is that the current term limit policy represents no impediment to their business. I am prepared to accept their politically neutral assessment.”Mr. Brown’s suggestion that business leaders can publicly speak candidly, or privately to a PLP insider, can’t be taken seriously. Not after his Government’s extensive track record of hostility towards business leaders and/or non-Bermudians who publicly oppose PLP policy? Hence, the business leaders who do speak out do so anonymously.Mr. Brown‘s core assertion is that Bermuda’s current jobs and capital exodus is being used wrongly to attack the PLP for political gain and public policy has little bearing on Bermuda’s deepening economic crisis; our situation could not have been foreseen and is driven by external forces.I would direct Mr. Brown to a Royal Gazette article entitled “Dublin to benefit from any exodus from Bermuda”. This article cannot be dismissed as someone taking our current predicament and back fitting it into an economic political attack as he tries with mine.This was published on July 18, 2003, the eve of the implementation of term limits. One (again anonymous) observer predicted that “[t]his will not happen overnight…But if this continues, we will look around one day and see that they have all gone. Our houses will be worth nothing huge mortgages and negative equity everywhere no one to rent our apartments and we will have unemployment for the first time in living memory. It is a sobering thought.”Starting to feel familiar?The facts are not as Mr. Brown declares, “an inconvenient truth” for me. I wish that were the case. This is Bermuda’s current, but largely avoidable, truth.Mr Brown is, as they say, entitled to his own opinion. This is the editorial page after all. But he’s not entitled to his own facts.