The United Bermuda Party opposes the Municipalities Reform Act because it is a dishonest piece of legislation whose real aim is to destroy local government in Bermuda.

It speaks of reforming Bermuda's two municipal governments while its provisions are designed to eviscerate their operational viability.

By stripping away revenues sources and increasing their taxes, the Government aims to drown the corporations in red ink and finish them off at a later date.

The elimination of local government will achieve a number of negative results including:

l Job losses amongst the workers of the two corporations.

l A decline in local services and the loss of day-to-day focus that keeps the city and the Old Town working well.

l The central government accruing more power and control over people's lives.

One of the faults of the Bill is that it reflects the outgoing Premier's personal agenda not Bermuda's agenda.

The Island is facing some of the most serious challenges in its long history – from gang violence to economic stagnation and decline – yet the Premier has opened this new front that distracts from these important challenges. That he plans to take the legs out from under the corporations and leave others to clean up the mess is irresponsible.

Despite the long-term implications of the legislation, Minister without Portfolio Zane DeSilva gave MPs just one week to consider it. This rush job – coming in the midst of an end-of-session push in which MPs have important pieces of legislation to consider – stands against the backdrop of the Bill being drafted in total secrecy. The Government did not answer questions in Parliament from John Barritt or Dr. Grant Gibbons nor did it bother to discuss its plans with the public, let alone the corporations. That Mr. DeSilva said he looked for to a "meaningful… discussion" on the Bill speaks to the cynicism and spin at the heart of this exercise.

The reality for us is this:

The Bill will not lead to better-run municipalities. It will not make them more efficient or more productive; indeed we believe it will lead to deterioration of services, certainly over the next few years as the corporation resources are bled dry by the provisions in the Bill.

Bermudians have to ask themselves: Are they ready for street litter, backed-up sewage systems and unkempt parks? Are corporation workers and their families prepared for job losses?

Make no mistake: An operation cannot carry on as usual when it loses 40% of its revenues and has to pay more in taxes. Something will have to give.

This is not the right priority for Bermuda. The country is beset with too many problems; people are suffering, people are stressed.

The takeover of the municipalities is an ill-timed distraction the Government does not need, given that it shows signs of being overwhelmed or stretched to the limit in fundamental areas of responsibility: education, public safety, public finance, health care and tourism.

The Government needs to focus exclusively on the hard challenges facing everyday people, not the dictates of one man's agenda.

In the meantime, the Corporation of Hamilton is one of the few public bodies working well today. It lives within its means, its workforce performs well and it has recognised its shortcomings and is correcting those shortcomings in open and transparent ways. The government should be applauding and emulating its performance, not trying to destroy it.

We also note that three years ago the Corporation of Hamilton put forward a comprehensive list of reforms to increase the franchise, broaden the voter base and modernise its operating procedures. The Government should have at least sat across the table to discuss the reforms, but it did not.

In the end, we say: Give the corporations a chance to continue the reforms they are embarked on. Shelve the Bill for a year, clear the air, give people a chance to see its aims in better light and go from there. This will give Bermuda the opportunity for better decision-making than what is happening today.

We can build better, more democratic municipal entities without destroying them in the process. In this case, we think it's best to measure twice and cut once.