This is the full text of Shadow Finance Minister Pat Gordon Pamplin’s Reply to the Budget given in the House of Assembly today:To His Honour the Speaker and Members of the Honourable House of Assembly:

Mr. Speaker,

We in the United Bermuda party have been mindful of our obligation to stand ready to serve the people of Bermuda by the implementation of our ideas and our vision, which far surpass that to which the people of our country have been subjected for the past nine years. The ideals and values that have shaped us continue to strengthen us.

The United Bermuda Party has as its core principle, advancing the interests of all of our people, irrespective of who they are. We have always worked hard to make this country a better place for all. Our interest in building a better Bermuda goes beyond the partisan political divide>We have a special sensitivity for those who are struggling in this fast-paced and increasingly challenging economy.

The 2007/08 Budget symbolises an amazing disconnect between the PLP government and the people.The rosy picture articulated by the Finance Minister does not reflect the reality of the second tier Bermuda with whom we empathise.

Mr. Speaker, we in the United Bermuda Party have been listening closely to what people are saying. We talk with them on their doorsteps, in their churches and in their places of work. We have our ears to the ground and I can tell you that this budget means nothing and says nothing to them.

It says nothing to people who are struggling each day to make ends meet. It says nothing to single mothers desperate for an affordable rent. It says nothing to seniors who want to keep their one-stop shop at the Medical Clinic. It says nothing to families who need a break from the financial pressures. It says nothing to parents who desperately want to know that their children can get the education they need to succeed in this society and the world abroad.

The time has come to call the PLP government to account. Just who are they governing for? Just who has been best served during its nearly nine years in power? Not the people, in our estimation. Maybe themselves! Maybe their friends or maybe those who want to do business in Bermuda. But not the people! It is our contention that the PLP Government has not yet learned how to manage the machinery and power at their disposal for the benefit of people in need. They spend an inordinate amount of time trying to find excuses for their shortcomings, rather than governing for the people.

How else do you explain the nine-year housing crisis; the continuing, catastrophic declines in public school graduation rates; the emptiness of sustainable development; longstanding manpower shortages in the Police Service and the resulting rising crime or eight years to build the new St. George’s Rest Home?

Mr. Speaker, somewhere along the way this Government got lost. Somewhere along the way to the champagne or the plane, they forgot the point of good government. Somewhere along the way they forgot the meaning of public service.

The reality for too many people is that nearly nine years of PLP government have been wasted years; years when problems that were known never got solved. They were years of mismanagement, years of poor planning and years of bad execution. Mostly they were years of fundamental disrespect for the people who put them in power; years when the meaning of that vital social contract was not grasped and understood.

We would never have betrayed the trust of the Bermudian people by taxing them unreasonably. We would never have spent their money unwisely or used it to buy votes. Such behaviour is reprehensible. We would never have misled the electorate as they did during the 2003 election. We certainly would not have rewarded any Minister who professed to be in possession of the answers to Bermuda’s problems, but who failed to share those ideas until the opportunity for personal advancement came about. However, in the PLP Government that minister is called Premier.

Mr. Speaker, there are many items that have been included in this billion dollar expenditure to which we will refer. However, in sensing that this government has totally lost its way, we will give prominence in this response to those innovative, sensible and sensitive ideas that we, as a United Bermuda Party Government promise to deliver to the people of Bermuda, when given the opportunity.

Mr. Speaker, this United Bermuda Party government-in-waiting will continue to share with the people of Bermuda its vision in the months ahead, a vision that will set us apart from the government - a vision that puts people first.

Mr. Speaker, the starting point for the United Bermuda Party in this Budget year is to put forward policies and ideas grounded in an understanding of what is happening to the people.

It is clear to us that Bermuda works for a lot of people. We see it in robust incomes, shiny new office buildings, new cars, new restaurants, trips abroad and household renovations.

It is also clear to us that Bermuda is not working for a lot of people. Too many are slipping between the cracks. Too many are struggling to make ends meet. Bermuda is moving too fast and they can’t keep up. Opportunities are beyond them. Home ownership is out of reach. Food is expensive. Rent costs far too much. Public education is not giving them the tools to succeed. They are old. They are young. They don’t think Bermuda is working for them, and they don’t see things changing. Every day they see up close a world beyond them - one of the richest places on the planet. It feeds resentment, even despair. It creates feelings of alienation, a sense that they do not have a place in their country. Frustration is compounded because they have nowhere else to go.

Mr. Speaker, we are talking about the existence of two Bermudas. People from all walks of life are aware of the divide and they know it does not bode well for their future, or their children’s future.

People from all levels of society want to know that their government has policies and programmes in place that will improve the situation. They want to know they have a government that shares their concerns and sense of urgency.

This ninth PLP government budget registers concerns for problems that have been with us too long, but it contains no sense of urgency about solving them, no sense of urgency about helping people most in need.

In the world of two Bermudas, there is water, water everywhere - there is even champagne - but not a drop to drink for those in the second Bermuda. The PLP government has boasted that we have achieved the highest per capita GDP in the world, but this has more to do with guest workers and international business than Bermudians. How has the PLP government sought to balance this stark inequity, this fault line running through our society? It hasn’t.

Mr. Speaker,

The policies and programmes that the United Bermuda Party will put forward this morning and in the weeks ahead are about reaching out to people in need. It’s about throwing them a line. It’s about easing pressures in this pressure cooker of an Island. It’s about making Bermuda work better for them. It’s about making Bermuda work better for everyone.

The PLP government seemed pleased that it did not increase taxes on anyone but people earning the very highest incomes. We think they fell short of what is needed by the many families struggling in the other Bermuda, where stress levels are too high and the distance from economic betterment too great.

The United Bermuda Party believes lower income earners need a break. We believe the financial pressures they face are creating inordinate levels of stress that are undermining the quality of life for them and their familiesB>Payroll Tax cutsThe next United Bermuda Party government will help ease the burden on struggling families by putting more money in their hands. We will eliminate the payroll tax payable by any employee whose annual income falls at $36,000 or below. Based on the latest employment survey, the cost of this step will be approximately $12 million, which will be funded by an enhanced level of accountability in spending. The employer will not be required to pay for this initiative, while self-employed individuals will have the benefit of paying a lower total tax. In addition, the payroll tax on the next band of income will be reduced proportionately up to $50,000, at which point full payroll tax will be levied. Mr. Speaker, this is helping people who need it most, directly.Education The focal point of the next United Bermuda Party government will be to address the failure of the PLP government to ensure that our children are equipped to face the future. Mr. Speaker, you may recall that the PLP government sailed into power in 1998 on a ticket that promised educational reform. Nearly nine years, three Premiers and six Educations Ministers later, they have now in this budget committed themselves to a comprehensive, systemic review of the public education system. Where was this commitment in the years since 1998? As the Premier lamented, we should be building on steps already taken.

Education should be the bedrock of our community, but in an almost-criminal blasé attitude towards our children, the Minister of Education admits that with less than fifty percent of our children able to graduate, the results are not as one would hope! It certainly did not require brilliant intellect for that revelation. Put more bluntly, the system is failing our children.

Even more distressing is the information that there are so many programmes that have been started under this PLP government that have not been allowed to develop to completion, because a new flavour of the month comes along. Each programme implementation comes at tremendous cost, but, like six-year-olds all gravitating towards the ball on the soccer pitch, Ministers are running amok trying on the latest airy-fairy idea, creating motion and noise but no progress. These actions are indicative of no plan. How could the PLP government profess to be concerned about education yet at the same time create a heavier burden for our children to attend schools, colleges and universities overseas by increasing foreign currency purchase tax by 100 percent? It makes no sense.

Education requires commitment, both by the professionals who deliver and by the government who directs. How painful has it been for teachers to see $58 million being wasted on poor planning and execution of the construction of the Berkeley site, while many of them were taking money from their own pockets to purchase basic supplies and teaching material? We have a first- class, state-of-the-art facility that will continue to fail our children because the government has no vision. They focused on bricks, mortar and more mortar, but our children were left out.

The United Bermuda Party plan for education reform focuses on three basic principles:

1) Increased emphasis on the individual student and the role of the parents;

2) Setting higher standards; benchmarking student achievement against international student -dent achievement against international student performance standards and demanding greater accountability for better results; and

3) Increased responsibility and flexibility for each scho

We will repeat our proposals because they are critical to the success of our education system:

[bul] There will be a licensed teacher in every classroom and teacher effectiveness testing will be administered regularly to measure performance and student achievement;

[bul] Teachers and parents will have the resources and tools to know if their children need extra support and development of a special talent;

[bul] Achievement levels of all students will be tested regularly against international student assessment standards;

[bul] Performance of individual schools will be measured and reported on a regular basis to the people of Bermuda;

[bul] Our students will learn in an environment that is rich in information technologies that will support their individual learning styles and needs.

For their own sake and for Bermuda’s future, our children must be able to compete on the world stage. A United Bermuda Party government will deliver a public education system that graduates students with the right academic, technical and life skills to enable our children to serve the present age. We will adopt the success of the private school system and replicate it throughout the public schools.Free Pre-schoolThe next United Bermuda Party government will commence firstly by recognizing that in order to achieve academic success, our focus will be on our children’s education at the earliest possible age.

The United Bermuda Party is committed to doing whatever is necessary to give our children the advantages they need to succeed in their education. As a Government, therefore, we would commit to free pre-schooling for Bermudian families in need. We will also ensure that a nutritious start to every child’s day is achieved by providing school breakfast for every child in government schools, from pre-school through middle school. We will ensure that books and uniforms are provided at a nominal cost to families, and where there is hardship, no cost at all. Hardship will be determined by pre-set criteria, and assistance will be given accordingly. This is helping those who need it most, directly.

We will commence the process of decentralizing the Ministry of Education, and to put authority and autonomy in the hands of school princip.TransportThe complete education experience is only as good as our students’ ability to get to school. The United Bermuda Party recognizes the hardship on some families who, among other pressures of expenditure, are required to find money to pay for transportation passes for their children. We will therefore, as government, commit to providing free bus and ferry services for all students in government schools.

We applaud the government for its initiative to extend bus frequency with slightly longer hours. However, their hope of minimizing the incidence of drunk driving is not likely to yield any measurable improvements, as many bars close at either 1:00 or 3:00 a.m. Technical EducationDuring 2006, we learned about the inappropriate use of funds at our only institute of higher learning, to the detriment of student funding. A United Bermuda Party government will commit to establishing a system of accountability for use of College funds, and demand that the Board of Governors have effective oversight of college spending. We will provide free attendance at the Bermuda College not just for the Regiment conscripts, which we support, but also for any student maintaining a B average and 95% attendance in secondary school.

The United Bermuda Party government-in-waiting recognizes the need for Technical Education and Apprentice Training, Hospitality Education and Service Training and Business Accounting Education and Support Training for the local market. We acknowledge that history would show that the Technical Institute was closed under a former United Bermuda Party administration, in an effort to combine all technical education at the newly formed Bermuda College. With hindsight the decision was misguided.

However, having recognized that, there is no excuse that nine years after the PLP government assumed the reigns of power, a full-scale, quality technical education programme has yet to be made available in the general curriculum of the Bermuda College, and worse yet, has not been introduced earlier in the Middle Schools.

The National Training Board has stood in the gap, but it is clear that the priorities, guidance, direction and resources to produce excellence in this area have been left begging. A United Bermuda Party government will address this deficiency forthwith.

We will launch a national Technical Education Instructors’ forum to produce instructors for Middle School through College level courses. We will incorporate technical education as an integral part of the curriculum from Middle School through Bermuda College, and designate a site specific to the attainment of this ideal - in short, revive the Technical Instie.HousingMr. Speaker, Bermuda’s most colossal crisis lies in the ability of its people to find affordable housing.

It boggles the mind, given the urgency of the housing situation, how any government can spend a billion dollars and leave housing in the hands of the private sector.

The PLP government in this budget has completely abdicated its responsibility by failing to provide a funding vote for housing. Rather, it has chosen to leave this crucial issue to some non-specified public-private funding leverage to which a non-elected Minister has committed. We have been given no details on this most critical issue.

Mr. Speaker, if it works anything like the public-private initiative at Southside, heaven help us. People are not happy that the PLP government effectively sold to a private company land at Southside that it already owned through the BLDC. The earnings for the public purse from this questionable deal was a paltry $3 million, while the contractor who bought the property in return for a commitment to build 54 units and sell them at a predetermined price is on track for $12 million profit.

Mr. Speaker, we question whether the sale prices of these homes are going to be affordable for the average Bermudian.

An engaged and caring government would have seen to it that the $12 million was kept in the consolidated fund for the construction of more affordable houses. Instead under the guise of economic empowerment or public-private leveraging, the contractor profits and people are left with fewer opportunities to put a roof over their heads. This must be the sweetheart deal of the century.

Sale of houses was supposed to bring money into the fund to provide for further construction. How many completed houses at Southside still stand vacant because of the prohibitive price demanded? We have heard that some discounts have been offered in order to offload those houses, but these discounts seem not to be widely publicized.

Where on earth is the commitment to the funding of the 100 lottery homes at Southside, the 100-unit complex at Ireland Island, the smaller 38-unit Perimeter Lane and the 24-unit Ewing Street mixed use that we have been hearing about for years?

Are there public-private leveraging arrangements for all of these projects? Is there another plan to sell out the public land with another ill-thought-through idea? This PLP government’s approach becomes more and more curious.

The United Bermuda Party government committed nine years ago to building more affordable houses. We reaffirmed that commitment as Opposition in 2003. We have pushed, urged, argued and even begged this Government to put people first, only to witness a gargantuan increase in the number of families who have no roof over their heads, or who live in sub-standard accommodations.

Last year the PLP government, amid great fanfare, put $20 million in the budget to build homes. They were so bereft of a plan that they did not spend one penny of that money. In this 2007/08 budget, they even revised last year’s provision to $10 million. This year, they have put zero, nada, nothing, zilch.

In fact, the Premier, in his plea to the delegates who would eventually elect him leader of their party, admitted that the failures of HIS government were untenable, and that progress had been disappointing. However, as he cast the finger of blame over his predecessors, it must not escape us that Mr. Premier was an integral component of the Cabinet that produced the failures. People are still homeless, and the numbers are increasing.

The failure to get anything done runs deep. This budget referred to the Vacant and Derelict Homes Plan “which was announced in the 2006 Speech from the Throne”— and the year before that, and the year before that and— there is still no appreciable progress.

This idea makes for nice fill for the government in creating a wordy document! Government has indicated that it has “identified 200 properties, targeted 25 on which action will commence this year.” How serious is this government about providing housing?

The United Bermuda Party government-in-waiting again stands by our commitment to increase the affordable housing stock for rent and for purchase for people in need. Among other things:

[bul] We will build 100 homes for affordable rent to meet the immediate need for emergency housing.

[bul] We will take immediate steps through tax incentives, duty free materials, use of government land and financial assistance packages to build affordable first-time homes costing no more than $300,000.

[bul] We will introduce a Shared Equity Plan to enable buyers who are unable to buy a suitable property on the open market and who do not have sufficient funds for a down payment, to purchase on a part buy/part rent basis.

[bul] We will commit to an open and transparent contract procurement process so that we can halt the present practice of government contracts being the reward for party loyalists.

Mr. Speaker, there can be no more excuses for failing to deliver on this basic need. A United Bermuda Party government will show the sensitivity that the PLP government does not comprehend. Health CareSince the Arthur Andersen report, the PLP government has had the benefit of study after study on health care and containing costs relating thereto, but little has been done about the quality of care, access to care or the cost of care. Recently it was announced that a second report by the Kurron Group would be conducted.

We are concerned that Government does not know which way to turn on health matters. One Government decision is to close the Medical Clinic after it had finally been set on the right path to effectiveness.

If one looks at the practical application of allowing those without the means of affording health care to visit the doctor of their choice, how long will it be before the bottleneck of administration for payments to service providers causes service to be withdrawn or at least, seriously curtailed? Further, how do our needy citizens travel from the doctor to the pharmacy to obtain prescriptions when, under the present scenario, they are a few steps away?

Other ancillary services such as X-Ray and Labs are within thirty seconds walk.

We already have the problem of private doctors requiring payment to be made in advance of treatment, and a reimbursement being sought by the patient. This is the product of the inefficient settlement process for GEHI, where settlement of doctors’ accounts has been slow and confused. How much empathy does the government believe that the administration departments in doctors’ offices will afford the disadvantaged when the treatment to civil servants is so poor? This makes no se.HospitalMr. Speaker, it was not long ago that the PLP government, under a former Minister, upset the public with a decree that a new hospital would be built at the Botanical Gardens. The concern was not a new hospital. Everybody acknowledged that that was a necessity. The problem was only the location.

This budget tells us that the PLP government will now provide a grant to the Bermuda Hospitals Board to assess the clinical needs, pre-design services, schematic design services and design development services. What happened to the money that was already spent on these things? What happened to the work that was apparently done by the consultants who presented their data at the Bermuda College dog and pony show? Does anybody on that side of the House know what is going on?Overview of spendingMr. Speaker, this PLP Government has become a ship with no rudder as they spend like inebriated sailors, with little measurable benefit.

One expects that inflation would drive more spending, but since 2000 inflation has held to an annual average of 3 percent, or about 25 percent over the past seven years. During that time, total spending by the PLP Government increased 78 percent, thus affirming that government is spending at a tremendously accelerated rate. Few if any Bermudians saw salary increases of that magnitude over the same period. Look at the disparity in the illustion (at top left):

<$>Mr. Speaker, when we compare expenditure and revenue, the trend lines show the widening gap between the two, thereby requiring additional borrowing to make up the shortfall (see graph second from top left):EmploymentMr. Speaker, the employment survey supports our observations that the trend is toward fewer and fewer Bermudians as a percentage of the total workforce. That is clearly the result of an expanding international sector that is recruiting more overseas staff. But we in the United Bermuda Party pride ourselves in acknowledging and supporting positive developments, and so today we note the 2006 Economic Review showing an increase in Bermudian employment!

Even though the number does not show a significant rise on thraph (above), there were three new jobs for Bermudians, up from 27,313 to 27,316. We believe, Mr. Speaker that we can pinpoint exactly where the whole, entire three of the jobs were created - the Chief of Staff, the press secretary and the consultant on young black males. We’re sure the Premier’s bodyguard is already included in next year’s total.

Mr. Speaker, we continue to be concerned that foreigners make up an increasing number of our workforce, as illustrated below. This number has crept up steadily from 9,645 in 2001 to 12,295 in 2006, and represents 31 percent of the total workforce (see graph above).

We recognise that the nature of international business demands appropriate staffing for which we do not have adequate numbers of Bermudians to fill, however, a significant number of work permit holders are not employed in the international business sector.

The reality is that we are exThe reality is that we are experiencing increasing lost opportunities for Bermudians, the mosaic of our landscape reflects a cosmopolitan face showing that our immigration policies are tenuous at best, while our children are failing to graduate to make their mark and contribution to the GDP - with no apparent relief in sight, because the PLP government chose to concentrate on bricks and mortar and more mortar.

More foreign employees require more homes, and as landlords cater to the guest workers, there are no houses that Bermudian workers can afford, thus the wasted $58 million during the Berkeley school development becomes even more critical. We must, therefore, respond to the people of this country in letting them know that inefficient use of their money has resulted in serious shortfalls in the delivery of necessary programmes. In short, the PLP government has failthem. Building maintenanceWe have witnessed the failure of Government to consider the health impact on our children and teachers due to poorly maintained school buildings. We have seen a knee-jerk reaction to the problem with mould that, by definition, has significantly impacted the public purse, when all that was needed was foresight and a plan. CedarBridge was neglected and allowed to rot from the inside while Government was running around trying to douse fires and put their fingers in the dyke to stop the hemorrhaging at the Berkeley site. The benign neglect of the maintenance of public buildings by the PLP government has caused the useful life of such buildings to be seriously curtailed, such that buildings may require total depreciation within ten years.

We have witnessed this neglect at the Hospital, such that we have reached the danger point of sick building syndrome. We will develop, publicize and place out to tender a proper maintenance policy for all public buildings.Hotel Development and Hospitality Industry Training With the PLP government’s commitment to bring additional new hotels on line, even the most fervent believers among us will have doubted its ability to deliver based on its history. Almost every hotel development project that has been referenced by the PLP government either has no apparent movement, or is mired in controversy.

The likes of the Club Med property, where the highly reputable, Four Seasons hotel group was allowed to ‘get away’ in favour of some developer who was so secretive that even a personal appearance at a press conference was too difficult to manage; Lantana, where hotel concessions were granted, but the project is dead; Morgan’s Point, where the government is at sixes and sevens respecting its use; properties that have closed with no definitive opening date, and a City Hotel that has been long promised but has yet to see the light of day are examples where the intentions are paid lip service, while the reality of delivery fades into oblivion.

We accept that it is essential to have new, vibrant hotel development in Bermuda, but we believe that the existing landscape was ripe for redevelopment, rather than raping what is left of our pristine coastline for further development. We believe that the people of Bermuda would be interested in knowing whether Jumeirah had been invited to redevelop the Club Med property, or any of the other properties for which the PLP government has been unable to seal the deal.

The Town of St. George’s deserves an infusion of life, and this opportunity would have been an ideal one to have a win-win outcome. It appears that the government prefers to sell out to the highest non-Bermudian bidder, without regard for open spaces or future generations. There goes any aspiration of a commitment to sustainable development by this PLP government! If there is a glimmer of hope that any of the promised new developments will come to fruition - the project at Southlands, the Ritz Carlton or others rumoured to be in the pipeline, those developments will require people.

Where is the long-term planning respecting training? How many more Bermudians will have to stand on the periphery while imported help staffs our industries? With the current level of work permits standing at over 10,000, how will the requirements of staffing be met? Under the PLP government, their plan has yet to see the light of day. Every foreign worker that will be required is another residence denied a Bermudian, and possibly another vehicle to our already congested roads. The implications for continuing erosion to our quality of life arerious.Sustainable DevelopmentMr. Speaker, we want to make it very clear that the United Bermuda Party will support initiatives that take us closer to a more environmentally friendly and sustainable future. We feel that as a country we are at a crossroads on the issue of sustainable development. We do not believe that the PLP government has this issue as a priority.

We support measures to address climate change and the need to reduce energy consumption. After all, how many other places on the planet are more endangered than Bermuda by rising seas and hurricane-friendly temperatures caused by global warming? To encourage Bermuda to play its part on these important challenges, a United Bermuda Party government would:

[bul] Eliminate duty on energy saving products like compact fluorescent bulbs;

[bul] Implement a system of graduated land tax on homes/businesses which incorporate solar heating and photovoltaic generating systems; and

[bul] Eliminate license fees for electric vehicles and drastically reduce fees on small class A carsTourismThe so-called turnaround in our tourism industry has been driven by unprecedented reliance on cruise visitors. Cruise arrivals jumped 36 percent last year and now account for 55 percent of total arrivals.

Mr. Speaker, that is the highest ever proportion of cruise visitors to air visitors, and it is not the way to go if we want this industry to recover any of its former glory. Despite the publicity of increased air arrivals, the total for 2006 was only 299,000 compared to 369,000 in 1998, which itself was not a banner year, but it shows that the PLP government continues to fail miserably. Look at the difference between spending by cruise and air arrivals and you will see that no amount of spin-doctoring about surging arrivals can hide the fact that the economy is not bfiting.

<$>Mr. Speaker, the graph (above)<\p> very clearly shows that cruise arrivals account for just one-sixth of expenditure of air arrivals. Lest we become overly optimistic that the years from 2004 are showing a marked improvement of air arrival expenditure, let me point out that the method of reporting changed in 2004 to include items that were missing from 1997 through 2003. What might appear to be an improvement is purely a manipulation of data.

Even with the manipulation of statistics, there can be no hiding the fact that total spending still has not got back to where it was in 1998, the last year of the United Bermuda Party government. In 1998, it was $480 million and in 2005 $394 million. The PLP government’s best guess for 2006 is somewhere in the area of $425 million.

Notwithstanding a change in the basis of calculation, it is still painfully apparent that the Department of Tourism is heading in the wrong direction in pushing for quantity over quality. Employment in the hotels and restaurants has fallen. The PLP government policies are not helping the people.

The billion-dollar budget grants hotels a two-month extension to the period during which they are charged reduced rate payroll tax. If the Minister got the balance right and concentrated on air arrivals, does it not follow that occupancy will be increased, and perhaps the extra shoulder months of reduced tax may not be required?

The next United Bermuda Party government will strike the correct balance between air and cruiarrivals.Social cohesionMr. Speaker, the United Bermuda Party recognises that there is serious financial hardship being experienced by a growing number of Bermudians. The PLP government vowed to determine the poverty level. However, while they are bean counting to see who has some and who has none, many of our people are hungry. However, to this PLP government, their philosophy seems to be ‘if you don’t have bread, eat cake’. In short, they just don’t care!

Had the money used for renovating two successive residences for two successive premiers been spent wisely, the pain and suffering for some families would have been eased, if not eliminated, and the government would not have the albatross around its neck of the People’s house that does not meet the need of the People’s Premier! Blatant waste! Further, while the People’s Premier needs a bodyguard, a press secretary and a chief of staff, and surrounds himself with such creature comforts and the trappings of office at the expense of our tax-paying citizens, basic needs are left unfulfilled.

A United Bermuda Party government will show its sensitivity to the plight of our poor by trimming waste within government, and producing programmes that embrace the entire population. SeniorsIt might appear to the Government that the criticism levelled at them by the United Bermuda Party government-in-waiting is politicking at its best. But the concerns that we have expressed are more than politics; they strike at the heart of governance, as the lack of efficiency in resource usage by the PLP government does extreme disservice to our treasures - our seniors.

We are encouraged to see that after many years of our grovelling, cajoling and begging, the government has responded somewhat to our recommendations. They have provided two more doctor’s visits, but a wholly inadequate 14 cents per day for medication for seniors with HIP - probably the cost of a single aspirin! There is also a financial commitment to renovate the Pembroke Rest Home, where the conditions have been deplorable. We are pleased - better late than never.

Mr. Speaker, the prescription benefit was a 2003 pre-election promise. Four years later and only a few dollars more, the government has mitted to initiating<$> an actuarial study to determine how the prescription benefit could be enhanced.

One would have thought that in the time between implementation at the last election and the eve of the next election, if the government was either serious or concerned, the information would have been obtained, and a proper allocation would have been made. Out of $1 billion, we could certainly do better for our seniors.

The fact of the matter is that this government has paid little attention to seniors, when they should have been getting the most sincere attention. Our seniors need help and this government has done a poor job of helping them.

A United Bermuda Party Government would move quickly to ease the hardships facing seniors. We will:

[bul] Boost pensions;

[bul] Provide free preventive and basic care at a health care clinic to needy seniors who either have no coverage or whose insurance limits doctors’ visits;

[bul] Provide free prescription drugs, eyeglasses and dental care for seniors who cannot afford them;

[bul] Work with the banking community to initiate a scheme of reverse mortgages;

[bul] Fast-track development applications for families wishing to add on an apartment for their ageing family member;

[bul] Provide duty-free building materials as well as land tax relief for any apartment where a senior is the resident leaseholder;

[bul] Work with the Bermuda Housing Trust and other private developers to build assisted living facilities for seniors;

[bul] Implement a programme of assistance for caregivers;

[bul] Hire an Alzheimer’s geriatrician, and another general geriatrician, both of whom will be full time; and

[bul] Create an office for a Seniors Advocate to provide daily support.

In short, our seniors are hard done by, and deserve better. Even Robin Hood, who robbed the ‘fat-cats’, gave to the poor and needy!YouthMr. Speaker, we constantly hear how important our youth are, and that we must engage them for the future. Indeed the Premier has committed to a new dog and pony show to touch base with and listen to our college students who are studying abroad.

At the same time, we do not see in this budget a commitment to funding for the implementation of absentee balloting. The most powerful conversation that we can have with our young people is through the ballot box. The government ought not to be disingenuous, and should put its money where its mouth is and where its feet are pning to go.SportMr. Speaker, we saw last year an $11 million funding for cricket development, and most recently, a $15 million funding for soccer. We agree with the ultimate benefits that these sports can provide, but we do not agree that other sports ought to take a back seat for government funding. Many other sports have produced world-class athletes and have created international recognition for our tiny island.

The United Bermuda Party would like to see a National Sports Plan in which criteria are set for every sport, and that women in sport enjoy a level of prominence in such a plan. In addition, before any sport is eligible for government funding, the umbrella of accountability must be the determining factor. Therefore, a United Bermuda Party government would ensure that all national sporting organisations will submit current audited accounts before any public funds are disbursed.Public SafetyHow can any government, with one iota of concern for the safety of its people, in an environment where crime and drugs fit together like hand and glove, dismantle the focal Ministry of Nationarug Control? It makes no sense.

Mr. Speaker, our concern for public safety has never been more acute. Violent crime has spiked to an all-time high; the final three months of 2006 being the most violent since Police began recoding statistics. Our roads seem to be more unsafe than ever. Just this week, a 27-year-old man died in a cycle crash, the fourth road fatality this year. We know the drug problem is out of control. The Government has responded by initiating talks with the Governor on “new and innovative ways to fight crime.”

A United Bermuda Party Government would not need to talk. We already have a plan and it begins with tough action across the board. We will get Police numbers up to full strength, and we will make sure there is a visible Police presence on the streets of Hamilton and in every parish.

Our plan is detailed, but it boils down to one goal: Making sure that people who break the law understand that there is a high degree of certainty that they will be caught, prosecuted and punished to the full extent of the law.Economic EmpowermentMr. Speaker, high on the list of priorities for the United Bermuda Party was the creation of an Economic Empowerment Zone in North Hamilton. The PLP government, rightfully and justly adopted this idea, and has overseen its implementation. In conjunction with the Small Business Development Association, there has been some success.

Mr. Speaker, with incremental steps being made to advance a cause, why on earth would a government want to stifle progress by imposing tariffs that cut to the heart of profitability? We do not have manufacturing plants in Dockyard, textile plants at Southside or any other means to stock any retail operation. Of necessity, any business operating in this jurisdiction will be required to obtain goods from foreign soil. The Finance Minister lamented that the cost of the foreign currency purchase tax had not been increased since 1994. There was a reason for this — an increase was not necessary.

What on earth could possibly justify increasing this tax 100% from 25 basis points to 50 basis points? The government is not only flogging local retail businesses that have to purchase foreign exchange in order to stock their shelves, the likelihood is that these extra charges will be passed on to the consumer. At what point will the consumer determine the markup to be unpalatable, and opt to do without? Is this move helping to sound the death knell for retailing? This tax does not impact international business - their earnings are already in foreign currency. They do not have to purchase foreign exchange. This increasekes no sense.Race RelationsMr. Speaker, the government indicated that the CURE statistics are not what they ought to be. Part of the responsibility must lie with the government because of its politics of division. They have used their most senior members to incite racial unease and have created a feeling of apprehension among some employers, especially when racial epithets hurled by government members are allowed to go unchecked? The PLP government has exacerbated the failure in this area of CURE because they have not had a welcoming, constructive approach. Listen to some of what has been said by senior PLP government members:

“Who cares what ‘they’ think”; “You’re a black man with a white man’s heart”; “I am sick and tired of the UBP house niggers”; “I couldn’t have called the member a racist dog because I can see he is not a dog.”

These are just a few of the disgustingly divisive comments that come to mind. Is it possible that mistrust has deepened as a result of such comments? We should ALL commit to working together to unite our people. A United Bermuda Party government will commit to this ideal. When we are successful, we will not have to legislate inclusion.International BusinessWho is the obvious target of the PLP government’s spending indiscipline? The balance sheets of large corporations are the natural focal points. They have a lot of money, so we can tax them. “Let’s milk this cow till she’s dry, and then kill the goose that laid the golden egg”, seems to be the modus operandi of the government.

The reality is that international businesses have to account to their shareholders, whose investment in such businesses is expected to yield a satisfactory rate of return. While raising the salary cap to $350,000 may be of little consequence to some, it is difficult to understand the justification when the government’s own evaluation of its favourable outcome in additional revenue for the 2006/2007 cited, inter alia, the additional, unexpected windfall in payroll taxes for which they had not budgeted.

Government ought not to let the green-eyed monster envy the progress that astute business management has achieved, while it has failed miserably with the people’s money and, most importantly, failed to give our children the educational foundation they need to succeed in the interional sector. Payment for programmesThe United Bermuda Party recognises that all projects that are promised must be funded. As government, we will therefore immediately provide additional available revenue, not by increasing taxes, but rather, by cutting government waste.

We will begin with returning to an appropriate style of government that suits our community. We do not have the treasury of the United States, and thus, the presidential style of politics is inappropriate for us. The unnecessary Press Secretary who says precious little (there is a Director of Communications, who is already well remunerated) is the beginning of the cuts. Although the salary of this position is stated to be $120,000, every bit of unnecessary expenditure makes funds available for use in crucial areas.

The Chief of Staff, if in fact it is required, should be a dedicated position. An efficient organiser could be appointed, with remuneration commensurate with the position. Exorbitant salaries can be avoided.

Ministerial salaries and the Premier’s salary will be cut by at least 20 percent. Ministerial travel would be brought into check. Consultant fees at a whopping $68 million are a seriously misused and abused cost centre, and will be pared to a necessary minimum. Open-ended per diem expenditure will be replaced by reimbursable expenditure that is supported by invoices.

We will commit to reducing the size of government by attrition. Clearly empire-building has been the order of the day since 1998. We will adopt a policy on advertising so that public funds will not be spent on publicity stunts to influence the electorate. Debt and managementMr. Speaker, the Finance Minister stated that the government’s debt management record is one of prudence and restraint. They have borrowed wisely, she said, and ‘invested the borrowed funds in hard assets and infrastructure that will continue to deliver value to the community for generations to come’.

Let us look for a moment at the investment to which the Minister refers. The Second Senior School (Berkeley) had an original TAF of $71.2 million, under the late former Finance Minister Eugene Cox. We accept that the building has now been completed and is in use by our students, but at what cost? This budget shows that the TAF for the same project has now escalated, no - skyrocketed to a new high of $128.6 million, some $57.4 million more than it should have cost. Is this management? The Sylvia Richardson Care Facility in St. George’s started out at a TAF of $9.85 million, and ended up at $25.2 million. Is this prudent use of money?

The Minister heralded, to thunderous applause from her team, the retirement of a $20 million note issue that falls due in June 2007. Pray tell, Mr. Speaker, what is the excitement in paying a bill that is due? The excitement would have been justified had there been early debt retirement! Then, Mr. Speaker, a few breaths later, we see that there will be borrowing of $89 million to pay for capital budget items. The silence from the rank and file was deafening. Further, with $1 billion of expenditure how could the Causeway disappear from the radar screen? What’s happened to Lefroy House? Where is the Sandys Community Centre? Why has the recycling plant been constructed, but is still not operational?

The current and capital account expenditures for 2006/07 revealed an additional $22 million unauthorised expenditure. Supplementary expenditure in excess of appropriations included in the budget should be brought to the House for approval, unless such expenditure was a result of an emergency. We haven’t seen any emergencies, other than CedarBridge mould remediation, but we also haven’t seen any supplementaries. Look at the illustration showing debervicing costs (above). It is costing the taxpayer $22 million, compared to $9.6 million in 2001/02; more than the expenditure of some entire ministries, but there is no curtailing of government spending

Mr. Speaker, as for debt retirement, the Minister took great pains to state that $150 million debt was inherited from the last United Bermuda Party administration. But, Mr. Speaker, these astute PLP government armchair critics, in the first five years of its administration surely did not consider acceleration of debt retirement. During that time, they paid off against the debt a paltry sum of $3.5 million. Is this the new definition of prudent, astute management? Government has been anything but frugal or attentive to the fiscal values of fairness and equity. They have taxed the people to raise funds for capital projects, wasted the money, and then removed capital projects from the budget. That’s not very astute; in fact it could be construed as false pretences.ConclusionFor 3,000 days, this PLP government has had the opportunity to serve the people of Bermuda in a fair, equitable and judicious manner. They have squandered not just the opportunity, but significant sums of money in the process.

They have presided over 3,000 days of an administration that has borne witness to a crisis in housing where costs are out of reach, jobs that are unattainable, education that is crumbling, unprecedented drainage of public funds, a culture of dishonesty and actions by some that would cause right-thinking people to question. Above all, they seem to have forgotten the reason they were put into power: to represent and work for the people of Bermuda.

Mr. Speaker, compost is defined as a mixture of decaying vegetation and manure. The government, through the Marsh Folly plant, has historically given away this product. It now commits to producing it, monitoring the weight of it and selling it to the public. But they ought to know, Mr. Speaker that we know what they are selling and we’re not buying it! Remember, fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker

Tourism ‘revival’ not benefiting economy