The 42-second approval of the Bermudiana bill probably wrecked Bermuda's last chance of having a new hotel.

The warning was given yesterday by Bermuda Financial Centre Ltd director Fraser Butterworth as controversy raged on over MPs' handling of the bill.

BFCL had earmarked the Bermudiana site off Pitts Bay Road for a hotel, offices and some 45 apartments.

But Friday's passage of the Bermudiana Site Rehabilitation Act 1996 in the House of Assembly virtually ended that dream.

Instead, the private bill allows ACE Ltd and Exel Ltd to bypass the 60/40 ownership rule -- which requires that 60 percent of a company be Bermudian owned -- and take over the property.

The two insurance giants had agreed to buy the land from Argus Insurance and develop it for offices if the bill passed and planning permission was given.

Now the legislation, introduced in the House by Opposition Progressive Labour Party MP Reginald Burrows, must go to the Senate.

Yesterday Mr. Butterworth told The Royal Gazette he was astounded the House of Assembly had passed the bill without debate.

"I certainly thought it was worthy of debate. I was expecting it to go through, but I thought it would have several turns of the wheel.

"I think the issue of widespread foreign ownership is a desperately dangerous one for Bermuda. This a major change of policy.'' Mr. Butterworth -- whose views were shared by several Government MPs -- added Bermuda desperately needed a hotel.

"BFCL offered a new hotel with the supporting finance of offices and apartments.

"I dare say that was the last chance to have a new hotel in Bermuda. I can't now see any site on its own being developed for a new hotel.

"Hotels just don't make a lot of money by themselves. Any hotel is a desperately tricky thing to finance.'' Managing director of the Argus Group John Sainsbury was also amazed by the swift passage of the bill. But he rejoiced in the outcome.

"I tend to feel that it would have been appropriate to have had some discussion on the bill, both for people to say why they supported it and why they had misgivings. Naturally, I'm happy it was passed.'' Mr. Sainsbury said he was surprised MPs had not been watching Mr. Burrows more closely when he introduced the bill for its second and third readings.

"I would have thought they would have been watching him like a hawk and would have taken the opportunity to have said something.

"I think it's a bit hard to blame Mr. Burrows. After all, he was just doing what anyone would do with a private bill.'' Yesterday several MPs continued to voice outrage over the passage of the bill.

Works and Engineering Minister C.V. (Jim) Woolridge said he had been at a committee meeting with Government MPs Clarence Terceira and David Dyer when the bill went through.

"It had been agreed we would be notified when debate on the Stalking Act, the previous piece of legislation, had been completed.

"I was upset to find out the Bermudiana bill had gone through. I wanted to speak on it.

"I feel the bill was of sufficient importance to warrant discussion since it concerned a change of policy.

"It should have had a wider hearing even though both political parties had discussed it in their caucuses. The voter should have had the benefit of knowing why we were doing this. It's a very sad day for Bermuda.'' Asked how he would have voted, Mr. Woolridge replied: "Let's just say I would prefer it had been done a different way.

"I feel my constituents deserved to know where I stood on such a fundamental issue.'' In the aftermath of Friday's vote, Minister of Technology and Information John Barritt said: "I'm ashamed and embarrassed at what occurred in Parliament.'' "A bill of such magnitude should certainly have been debated. It seems incredible it should go through when only about half the MPs were present.'' United Bermuda Party Government backbencher and former Deputy Speaker Tim Smith said: "I'm stunned that the bill went through in less than 42 seconds.'' He pinned the blame on Mr. Burrows, saying the Opposition should have triggered a debate.

"He showed a lack of courtesy in respect of the House and the people of Bermuda.

Mr. Smith also claimed Mr. Burrows had introduced the bill incorrectly.

He said Mr. Burrows had not moved all the clauses of the bill, nor the schedule.

And he would be raising this issue with House Speaker Ernest DeCouto today.

Mr. Barritt and Mr. Smith admitted they had been unaware of Parliamentary rules on debating private legislation.

Mr. DeCouto later pointed out to MPs that Parliamentary rules for debating private bills and public ones were different.

Bill's passage rings new hotel death knell From Page 1 With a private bill, any MP wishing to debate had to ask the Speaker to move the bill be "committed to the House in the Committee of the whole House for consideration''. This had not occurred.

Yesterday Government Whip Rick Spurling said: "I didn't anticipate the bill going through like that.

"I had expected Mr. Burrows to speak to it because it had been so topical. I expected him to give an explanation that would have given everybody a chance to chip in. I never thought it would be approved in 40 seconds.'' Mr. Spurling, however, said it would be hard to apportion blame.

"Mr. Burrows had a perfect right not to speak, so he didn't do anything wrong.

"Given the importance of the issue to Bermuda, however, I think there was a responsibility to speak on it. As there was for the Government. But everything happened too quickly.'' Mr. Spurling added he would have spoken on the bill and declared his interest -- his law firm, Appleby Spurling and Kempe acts for Argus.

"I was going to support the bill. In my view it was a one-off situation, a unique set of circumstances.

"I don't want to be setting a precedent with waiving the 60/40 rule. Every case has to be considered on its own merits.'' Mr. Spurling could not comment on Mr. Smith's complaint about the way Mr.

Burrows piloted the bill.

"To be honest, I wasn't really listening to the words. Tim Smith has checked the tape and there is some possibility that the appropriate words were not used.

"If that is proved I don't know what effect it would have. Probably none. I don't think it would invalidate what happened.'' Mr. Burrows could not be reached for comment yesterday.

Government rebel MP Ann Cartwright DeCouto said Finance Minister Grant Gibbons and Premier David Saul should have stood up and explained the implications of the bill and why Government supported it.

But yesterday Dr. Saul defended the passage of the bill.

"If there had been any questions asked we would have spoken. I was surprised that those who had expressed opinions to me about the legislation weren't in the House to ask questions.

"It's not a Government bill and, therefore, Government didn't have to talk to it.'' He pointed out the legislation had been examined by the private bills committee.

"This is a joint select committee made up of members of Parliament of both sides of the Lower and Upper House.

"They had discussed the bill and both parties had discussed the bill at length. The onus was on individual members of Parliament to express their opinions. Government was not obliged nor were we intending to provoke debate.

"We do not have to stand up and explain to the House the principle behind the bill.

"I think most of arguments were in the Press long before the bill went up to the House. The United Bermuda Party spent over six or seven hours discussing it.'' Dr. Dyer, Minister of Youth Development and Recreation, said MPs had to follow a procedure for debating private bills.

And he pointed out the passage of private bills tended to be swift.

"I agree this one had a slightly higher profile, but the normal procedure was followed.'' Asked whether he backed the bill, he replied: "It's immaterial whether I supported it.''