The Affordable Bermuda Agenda, published with much self-glorification, falls woefully short on solving the issues Bermudians face with the cost of living. While I commented at the time of release, it is worthwhile taking a closer look at the report.

If you can stomach the 40-plus pages littered with glossy photographs, and civil servant-written forewords and thank-yous, it is clear the document is far closer to a public relations exercise than a substantive economic plan.

Despite repeated mentions of implementation and data-driven action, there are no measurable targets or fiscal commitments, and Bermudians are being asked to trust that voluntary business co-operation and policy reviews will lower prices.

There is no enforcement, no timeline, no metrics. The home affairs minister even recycled the phrase “shared sacrifice”. I don’t see much of that from the Ministry of Home Affairs, with Caricom trips galore.

As is common with this government, many initiatives contained in the report that appear “new”, such as import duty cuts, housing incentives and energy reform, have been already announced in past Throne Speeches or Budget Statements.

Let’s face it, the essential-goods relief simply formalises supermarket discount programmes that existed before and is not a structural policy change. In fact, I have heard from more than one person in the business of food-selling that pressure is being put on by the Government to end or reduce pre-existing initiatives, which would presumably lend some credence to the Government’s announcement. This may very well be detrimental to the consumer, as it will potentially reduce choices for more savvy shoppers. The One Bermuda Alliance managed a 10 per cent reduction on Wednesdays, which is far better.

While it is accepted that we import almost all of our consumer goods, there is no development plan to change that dependency. Loose commentary that Caricom would magically reduce importation costs falls short on detail and long on justification for Caribbean Community.

While reducing import duties, waiving land taxes and subsidising housing are generally helpful, the report does not detail how the initiatives would be affordable to the Government generally, since all these plans reduce government revenue. This potentially means future tax increases to fill the gap. It is important that this is disclosed to give everyone the opportunity to assess the long-term viability of such measures.

Eerily similar to an episode of Yes, Prime Minister in an attempt to show that it is doing something, the Government has set up multiple committees to deal with the issue of cost of living without a clear accountability chain or legal authority for enforcement — essentially bureaucratic inflation without accountability. The minister even passed the buck to the Cost of Living Commission to advance regulatory safeguards and monitor progress. Talk about glorification of one initiative with the hard work being sent elsewhere. Just what does the Ministry of Home Affairs do?

Let’s face it. While we won’t kick a gift horse in the mouth, a 20 per cent discount for nine months may temporarily ease costs, but it is not sustainable. Once the programme ends, prices will likely rebound unless market structure reforms such as competition policy are introduced. This potential change was likely lost once MarketPlace bought out The Supermart and Harrington Hundreds.

So, let’s look at one initiative that the Government is hellbent on ignoring, and that is the government own goal of the sugar tax. It needs to be repealed. I wrote about this in 2018 — well before returning to the political fray — and noted that, based on other jurisdictions, the only way such a tax works is if all the following are implemented:

1, Retail prices on sugary drinks would need to be raised by 20 per cent or more

2, Subsidies for fresh fruit and vegetables would need to be between 10 per cent and 30 per cent

3, Taxing “other foods and beverages high in sugar, salt and fat” up to 50 per cent would help to reduce obesity

4, Earmarking revenues raised from the sugar tax for healthcare

5, Proper monitoring and evaluation to measure the effect of the sugar tax

6, Requiring warning labels on taxed products as an education strategy

7, Drafting a multidisciplinary policy and implementation plan that includes advocacy for political buy-in, monitoring and evaluation is critical

We know that has not happened. So, scrap the tax. The OBA has also called for exploring different construction methods, reviewing planning legislation to lower building costs, switching to liquefied natural gas fuels, building higher — now permitted in the City, and which I wrote about in 2023 — and consideration of subsiding shipping costs and finding fair ways to spread the cost load by increasing our population. Perhaps limited free movement under Caricom can be explored.

I accept that it cannot be right that wholesalers, grocery owners and construction company bosses appear to be disproportionately better off than most Bermudians. But our wholesalers, grocers and construction bosses are some of our largest employers of Bermudians, so we must also be careful what we wish for.

We know that lowering the cost of living in Bermuda is not easy. We know that there are systemic issues that need to be addressed. What is easy are gimmicks. And a cost-of-living summit and subsequent report that told us what we already know was just that. Gimmicks.

• Michael Fahy is the Shadow Minister of Municipalities, Housing and Home Affairs, and the MP for Pembroke South West (Constituency 20)