Whoa Nelly: It's getting hot in here

OT, hot, hot: that's what it was on Friday in the House on the Hill, Mr. Editor ? if only briefly. Yes, the air conditioning wasn't working properly for a time, and even if hot air does rise, it was occasionally uncomfortable, most especially when members were on their feet, speaking and making hard work of it; and no, Mr. Editor, all wisecracks aside, I don't believe this was someone's ingenious plan to keep our speeches and the day short. If it was, it didn't work. We were there until after nine in the evening.

What took us so long? I'll come on to that in a bit. First, let's get back to the heat. The flashpoint occurred during Questions and Answers. That's right, Mr. Editor, we actually had a live Question and Answer Period in the House on the Hill last Friday. Here's how it happened ? all quite by chance really. Yes, there were Ministerial statements, several of them in fact, including one from Ren?e Webb, her last as Tourism Minister, on what we in the Opposition now dub the Coco Loco Resort lease and for which she claims her former Ministry was not responsible, and this notwithstanding her lengthy statement on how wonderful the deal was ? and she meant for Bermuda, Mr. Editor, not John Jefferis! Ministerial Statements were then followed by Congratulatory and Obituary remarks from MPs as well. But ? surprise, surprise ? they did not fill the first hour and this meant, under the current Rules of the House, that if there were any PQs (Parliamentary Questions) down for oral reply they could be taken up.

As luck would have it, there were two sets of PQs that qualified, one of the sets on the Stonington lease ? which was some kind of fortuitous (big word for lucky) when you think about it: Remember Mr. Editor, under the Rules of the House, our questions have to be submitted and cleared by the Speaker ten whole days in advance.

The first set of PQs were about Bermuda's charities and were for Patrice Minors who, as Minister for Health & Family Services, is the Minister responsible under the Charities Act.

We learned that 276 of Bermuda's 373 active charities ? or 74 per cent of them ? are not up-to-date with the filing of annual financial statements as required by law. It has, to our knowledge, been this way for some considerable time now. But the Minister said that she was not keen on having the offending charities struck off the register which Government is required to maintain under the Act: "there would be virtually no charities in operation", she claimed, if this "draconian approach" was taken. At the same time, Minister Minors conceded, under further questioning, that the current lack of compliance was an unsatisfactory state of affairs.

Further questioning, you ask? Good question, Mr. Editor. Here's how it works: each member is entitled to submit three questions for answer (ten days in advance), but if they are marked for oral reply there can be three further supplementary questions for each of the three questions asked in advance, on the day they come up for answer in the House on the Hill. The supplementaries can be asked by any MP, providing they are recognised, of course, by the Speaker on the day in question.

Back then to the day in question.

Minister Minors was being pressed on Government policy when it comes to funding delinquent charities. She said there were changes on the way ? aren't there always? ? and that her Ministry is putting them in place with the help of the Accountant General.

"These new financial instructions", she explained, "call for stricter levels of accountability for organisations receiving funding to supply quarterly or annual financial records, as the case may warrant and other additional data. The Ministry ? is moving towards a model that will require all grant recipients to provide the required financial information before their third quarter or annual transfer is made as a condition of their grant." But when will this happen, the UBP's Trevor Moniz wanted to know ? and was the Minister prepared to resign if it didn't? Say what? Resign? You've got to be kidding? Well, no, but it didn't matter anyhow. The Speaker Who Was Not Amused immediately intervened and simply refused to allow Mr. Moniz to put the question. Actually, he had asked the question by then: Ms Minors was spared having to answer it, but not without effort by Mr. Moniz.

But the Speaker is also He Who Must Be Obeyed.

So we were moved on to the Stonington Hotel lease questions ? and we were starting to look and sound like a modern-day Parliament: timely and pertinent questions for a Government Minister on one of the issues of the day, following a Ministerial statement on the subject delivered an hour earlier.

Ex-Minister Webb first wanted to distance herself and her ex-Ministry from the decision.

"The parties to the lease are in fact the Bermuda College and Coco Reef Resorts Limited and not my Ministry as your question and the Auditor General implies", she said in answer to the first question from Opposition Leader Dr. Grant Gibbons. In her earlier statement to the House, Ms Webb had attempted to defend "the integrity" of all those involved in the negotiation process subsequent to tender, and disclosed that negotiation was undertaken by "the Bermuda College and the selection committee, comprising of private individuals and civil servants from various ministries". The usual suspects ? a nameless and faceless lot, one presumes ? for whom the Minister for Education is responsible, according to Ms Webb, and not Tourism.

The questioning intensified: why didn't the lease go back out to tender when it was decided that the lease could be up to 50 years and not 21 years as was originally thought AND when it was agreed to throw in an extra 1.9 acres of oceanfront property as well as two further acres of woodland reserve? Why? Why? Why? "The people want to know", shouted Mr. Moniz, "and the Minister is not answering the questions." The Speaker Who Was Not Amused (Again) rose and told Mr. Moniz to take his seat ? that means "sit" in parliamentary parlance. "Take you seat," declared the Speaker, who may have repeated himself once or twice for the benefit of those not listening, "or I will have you removed." "Throw me out then," replied Mr. Moniz, who may also have repeated himself once or twice for the benefit of those not listening, "the people want to know the answers to these questions." It was a tense, 30-second exchange. The point made, Mr. Moniz took his seat. The Speaker had once again established himself as He Who Must Be Obeyed. We moved on. A live, raucous Question Period was over.

It never got that lively again in the day, Mr. Editor ? and that probably had as much to do with the air-conditioning (or lack of it) as it did with the remaining items on the agenda.

Ho-hum, ho-hum, it's off to work we go

XCITEMENT was definitely not the order of the day on the next item: amendments to National Pension Scheme Regulations. Members seemed on the whole thankful that the Minister Paula Cox and her Shadow Dr. Gibbons were content to see this through on their own ? one more pas de deux from the ballet de Finance.

It was then on to the Education (School Support) Rules which, amongst other things, mandates that parents must not use profane language or make offensive gestures or engage in violent or threatening behaviour on public school property.

"I find it interesting that these things have to be put in writing," said PLP MP Dean Foggo who set the Rules down for debate. Interesting?! That qualifies for the parliamentary understatement of the year competition. They are all offences under the law already. But there was no disagreement from either side on what was needed and thus no clash. There was no vote either.

The Rules were set to become law unless Parliament voted against them and Mr. Foggo's motion was only to "take note". I noted that quite a few of us took note by speaking.

The same wasn't true of Michael Dunkley's motion that the House take note of the practices, procedures and policies of the Financial Assistance Department. The PLP members had obviously decided that only the Minister would speak, while Mr. Dunkley was joined by Suzann Roberts-Holshouser, Louise Jackson and Wayne Furbert for the Opposition. There was disagreement sure, Mr. Editor, but no real clash. This time, it probably had something to do with the fact that it was the supper hour.

The life of Brian

O JOKE, Mr. Editor, but the column has arrived in the House on the Hill? at least as far as one Ministry is concerned. I kid you not but we were featured in a Ministerial statement last week. Environment Minister Neleetha Butterfield was reporting on awards made under the Ministry's Environmental Grant Scheme ? and to date a total of $157,000 has been granted in support of 18 projects.

I must confess that the Minister caught my attention right at the outset of her remarks. "Notwithstanding the entertaining comments of the Honourable Member for Devonshire South Central in his weekly commentary, I do think the grant scheme and the recipients warrant credit and recognition in this public forum." A back-handed compliment, Mr. Editor, from an alert swivel servant (whom I can also presume is an occasional reader) who was fending off any criticism in advance. The top dogs are awfully sensitive to past digs that the slot for Ministerial Statements is often abused as much as it is used.

In any event, he didn't actually name the recipients in the statement, only the projects:

a recycling project at the Bermuda Institute (and here's hoping that it works better than the real one at Devon Springs)

the Trust's survey and catalogue of historic sites (Parliament included?)

horticultural training and certification programme ( that's a new idea then?)

a dolphin tracking programme linked up to a classroom ( if they can't do taxi drivers, I guess ?)

Bio Station examination of our seagrass beds (no, nothing to do with housing our people, Mr Editor); and

Experimental research on weed killing without herbicides and chemicals (the real weeds, Mr. Editor, the real weeds)

Concluded the Minister in her prepared statement: "I will await next Friday's edition with bated breath." Await no more. I was the one who was baited.

'Til next week then, JB the MP columnist.