Government was pilloried yesterday for amending its Clean Air Act to allow stringent pollution regulations to be "ignored.'' The Opposition accusation came during debate on second reading of The Clean Air Amendment Act 1993.

But after a long debate Shadow Environment Minister Mr. Julian Hall said the Opposition would not oppose the act and it was passed.

In introducing the legislation, Environment Minister the Hon. Gerald Simons said the changes were needed to assure "greater flexibility'' in enforcing the law.

The amended act would: Allow the Minister, the new Authority, and others to set requirements either more or less stringent than those set out in the regulations; Provide authority to pass regulations for better control over the handling and disposal of hazardous materials; Extend the time permitted to meet the regulations to up to five years from six months; and . Empower the Authority to require reporting from controlled plants.

Flexibility is the key, Mr. Simons said.

For example, if the hospital needed more time to meet regulations related to its incinerator, it would be prudent to show flexibility "rather than shut the facility down immediately.'' Or if Belco would be forced to shut its power plant down to meet the regulations, better to "lessen that standard in the short run'' than subject the Island to "blackouts and brownouts.'' In explaining the power to set requirements more or less stringent than those in the regulations, Mr. Simons gave the example of sulphur in fuel. The maximum sulphur level allowed in the regulations is 2.8 percent. But if some plants already use fuel with a lower sulphur content, it would be better to set a stricter limit for them than allow a switch to fuel with a higher sulphur content.

"We don't want to degrade the air further,'' he said.

In another "fundamental'' change, the act would allow the burning of waste other than horticultural waste in some circumstances. Mr. Simons gave the example of an oil spill. In some cases it would be better to safely burn it than leave it on a beach, he said.

It would also provide for the proper storage of batteries and other items that are to be removed from the waste stream before reaching the Tynes Bay incinerator.

The changes would also allow the Authority to require reports from plants, either generally or under specific circumstances. "A lack of information on many of the controlled plants on the Island is a great disadvantage we have,'' he said.

Opposition Leader Mr. Frederick Wade said he was "amazed'' Government did not have detailed information on emissions from plants in Bermuda "and they need five more years to do the necessary research and studies.'' One would think such information would be an important prerequisite to developing the regulations, he said.

The lapse "falls in line with this Government's management of the environment in all respects,'' Mr. Wade said.

Large amounts of arable land had been lost to development, and thanks only to the recent work of environmentalists, much had been done to prevent the destruction of the sea.

There was a dilemma in bringing in tough new standards while at the same time giving plants like Belco time to meet them. But there had been ample warning, and "I would have thought that many of these entities would have taken the time and the trouble to do the research themselves to determine what they would need to do.'' Cost was also a concern. Improvements at Belco could mean higher electricity costs, and "we're not in a very good position to be spinning off higher power costs'' to hotels and the public "already reeling under the cost of utilities in Bermuda.'' A formula had to be found to assure the cost burden was shared fairly. Mr.

Wade said he was concerned the National Trust was complaining it was not consulted on the regulations. In introducing other recent legislation, Government had talked of the importance of wide consultation, but in this case was moving from "participatory to dictatory,'' Mr. Wade said.

Independent MP Mr. Stuart Hayward began by commending the Environment Minister and his officials for their work on the new law.

But public concerns, including the MPs' own, had pushed the work along, he said. Mr. Hayward noted he wrote Bermuda's Delicate Balance and ten years ago pushed for a comprehensive environmental protection act. He also "can take some little credit'' for Government naming a Ministry the Ministry of the Environment, he said.

"I am grateful that we have reached the point where at least the protection of the air is about to take effect.'' Although the Clean Air Act was passed in 1991, it was "just words on paper'' without accompanying regulations.

The National Trust was "right on target'' when it expressed concern about the lack of its own and public involvement in developing the regulations.

The Trust was very vocal during hearings on the incinerator about the need for air quality protection, and the Development Applications Board in its ruling "was very concerned about the lack of air quality standards,'' he said.

In developing regulations, the Trust should have been involved "intimately'' to avoid the kinds of objections that arose with the incinerator, Mr. Hayward said.

At the time of the hearings, Government accused the National Trust of politics "simply because the National Trust was doing its job.'' As well as not having input on the regulations, the National Trust likely "didn't even know about the amendment,'' Mr. Hayward said. "The National Trust was kept out of the loop.'' In opposing the incinerator, the Trust did not begin with an aggressive tone, he said. But when the Trust brought a recycling expert to the Island, the Environment Minister refused to attend the public meeting and "treated that expert in a very perfunctory manner.'' Works and Engineering was now using recycling equipment from "the same people that the Ministry initially put down,'' he said.

Since then, talk of consultation and reaching a "Bermudian consensus'' seemed to be empty words.

In the last two years, "I am fairly certain that the only people consulted were those whose businesses might have been affected,'' like Belco.

Referring to a document entitled The Development of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act: Response to Public Input, Mr. Hayward said it could serve as an example to Government.

A comprehensive environmental act was needed because what happened in the air affected the land and water and vice versa. By taking a piecemeal approach, "you're almost condemning the overall process to failure,'' he said.

Mr. Simons said on radio that if passage of the regulations was delayed for consultation with the National Trust, it would interfere with the Trust's own objective of bringing the new law into effect as soon as possible, Mr. Hayward said.

This was "a catch-22,'' and a way of holding the Trust and the public "to ransom,'' Mr. Hayward charged.

The Minister said it was a condition of the DAB that the regulations pass six months before the incinerator is turned on, but the DAB did not say Government had to delay two years before bringing forward the regulations. Now, "you must delay the incinerator, or whatever, to meet your own late deadline.'' There was a brief exchange as Deputy Speaker Mr. Ernest DeCouto objected to Mr. Hayward's suggestion Government was holding people to ransom.

When the MP resumed, he said the public had a right to know what was going on, and it was not enough for Government to say it was acting in the public interest.

While there were costs attached to environmental improvements, inaction also had real costs, in terms of later clean-up and human health.

The Act should make provisions for members of the public to initiate complaints and the Authority should have the clear power to act on its own, he said.

It appeared the Minister could empower anyone to make less stringent regulations, regardless of their credentials, he said. And it was not specified that required reports from plants would be made public.

Was the time limit for meeting regulations being extended to five years from six months "with the knowledge that the incinerator will not meet the regulations?'' "Is the Act being determined by the incinerator, rather than the other way around?'' Hall -- National Trust raised valid concerns Shadow Environment Minister Mr. Julian Hall (Progressive Labour Party) also began by commending civil servants for their work in such an important area.

He also praised Mr. Hayward as "the principal spokesman in Bermuda and the principal watchdog for Bermudians'' in the environmental area.

Mr. Hall said he still hoped Mr. Simons would postpone passage of the regulations.

Moving to the concerns of the National Trust, Mr. Hall said the Trust had made a "massive'' contribution to Bermuda's environment and he understood how "the Bermuda National Trust would feel somewhat aggrieved were they not consulted.'' That said, Government had a duty to govern and "I deplore the tendency on the part of the UBP Government to pass the responsibility of Government on to bodies which are not within and under the control of the electorate.'' While he shared the Trust's concerns, the House and the Trust needed to be reminded it was set up to protect "lands and buildings of beauty and historic interest.

"There is no power of the National Trust or object of the National Trust which is referable even by way of argument to a detailed scrutiny of environmental standards which might be set by Bermuda's Government under the Clean Air Act,'' he said.

If the Trust paid more attention to its original mandate, "we wouldn't have fiascoes like the Trader's Gate'' demolition, he said.

That said, the Trust raised some valid concerns, he said.

For the Government to bring forward regulations and the same day amend enabling legislation to give "full and unfettered power to ignore the regulations...is not only laughable but throws into extremely high relief the poor management capability of the Government of this country.

"This Government, to put it at its highest, does not know what it is doing,'' he said. "If the Government knew what it was doing it would be even more dangerous than I fear even in my most fearsome moments.'' The amendment would enable the Minister and the Authority to ignore the regulations "whenever either thinks it's convenient,'' and the regulations "will be willy nilly ignored,'' he said.

In the civilised world, only in Bermuda under the UBP would such a law be found, he said.

If it will take five years for Belco to meet the regulations, the regulations should not be passed until then, he said. "The law falls into disrepute every time this House passes laws which it immediately thereafter sends out the message to the community will be ignored.'' The same thing recently happened with cable television regulations, he said.

The five-year delay could be used to educate the public about the need for and purpose of the regulations, he said.

There was a "compelling logic'' to Mr. Hayward's suggestion "that this has all come about because of the unseemly haste, if not the entire absence of anything but clumsiness with which the Government moved as regards the incinerator,'' Mr. Hall said.

It showed "mismanagement of the affairs of this country'' by the UBP, he said.

The former Minister listened to "absolutely no advice whatsoever except the advice coming from her own mirror.'' "It has to be made plain that we are in this fix because of the Bermuda Government's determination to just put in legislation simply in order to just tell the people of Bermuda we have enacted legislation.'' Shadow Minister of Delegated Affairs Mr. Stanley Morton stated that he represented areas close to Pembroke Dump and the Bermuda Electric Light Company the areas which should benefit most from any clean air act.

He described the Act as a "false pregnancy.'' He said: "It appears that the Government is willing and able to do something about the environment in Bermuda but when you read the Act it is all dilutions and does not have the strength, weight and maturity that it needs.

"The Act is watered down and minimised to give a flexibility for who and where the Minister is dealing with. We live in an environment depending on who you know and where you live. When you have laws that are supposed to be applicable to all it must be seen to be carried out to the letter of the law.'' Mr. Morton said that the primary concern should be life whether a person is a peasant or a multi-millionaire. He added there is always a conflict between people concerned with economics and people concerned with quality of life.

He said: "If you do not take seriously the lives of people living in the more industrialised areas the Government will become murderers because you contribute to the death and demise of the people in those areas.

"There are some theories that show that the numbers of people suffering from cancer could be attributed to living near to smoke stacks.'' Minister of Education the Hon. Clarence Terceira was heavily involved in the incinerator project as Minister of Works.

Dr. Terceira said that discussion over environmental issues had improved in recent years. He said: "When environmental concerns first appeared we had, what I would mischievously call, evangelistic environmentalists who were scientifically illiterate. It was a stage when they cried wolf.

"Now we have enlightened environmentalists working with the Government and business coming up with sustainable ideas.'' He said he could not work with the first hierarchy of the National Trust but when it changed he found the Trust "refreshing'' to work with.

Dr. Terceira accused Mr. Hayward of telling "untruths'' and claimed it was amazing that there had been calls to delay the construction of the incinerator.

He said: "These delays have caused these people living around the Pembroke Dump a lot of heartache which should have been over three years ago. For someone to get up and suggest a further delay just boggles the mind and must boggle the mind of people in Pembroke.'' Shadow Health Minister Mr. Nelson Bascome said that while driving along North Shore Road he played a game with his children where they had to close their eyes and use their smell to find out where they where.

Mr. Bascome claimed it was an easy game because of the distilling plant, the bus garage, the sanitary waste dump and the Pembroke Dump.

He said: "In the Pembroke Dump area people have complained about headaches and the smell in their homes is causing a degree of medical concern.

"Hopefully this Act will see to all the little things that we have a tendency to overlook but that we can pick up prominently with our noses.'' Defending the business world Government Minister the Hon. Harry Soares said: "It is obvious to anyone that we must change our ways. What has happened is that consumption has skyrocketed and with consumption come pollution.

"But there has to be a balance between what we would like to do and what is affordable. If we do not have a viable business community you will shoot the goose that lays the golden egg.'' Mr. Soares felt that the Act could cause problems in allowing technical officers to have too much power to set standards.

St. George's North MP Mr. Philip Smith UBP said that the National Trust should not be allowed to dictate to the Government, claiming it was an insult to the Minister.

Mr. Smith said: "If the National Trust wants to make decisions they should put up a candidate to run for Parliament.'' But Mr. Smith called for the Minister to organise a meeting to explain how the incinerator will affect the community in the North Village area.

He said: "When the smoke stack went up people started to get concerned. I feel it is no point having people frightened and having all kinds of ideas going through their heads. The main problem is fear of the unknown.'' Mr. Smith asked for an investigation into cancer levels among people living close to Belco.

Works and Engineering Minister the Hon. Ann Cartwright DeCouto said the Progressive Labour Party had taken The Royal Gazette story about the National Trust and ran with it, without carefully examining the argument.

The former Environment Minister said the Minister should have flexibility in cases where firms could not meet the standards for any particular time period.

And it needed the five year period in some cases for improvements to take place.

Mrs. Cartwright DeCouto gave a scenario where Belco in 10 years could have made a number of improvements but then could be hit by a hurricane. She said the company could not expect to operate at the same environmental levels immediately and should be given time to rebuild while providing electricity.

Clean Air Amendment Act passes She said: "I cannot let go some of the dribble I have heard from the opposite benches about murder and the importance of clean air.

"What we have not heard is how the people of Pembroke Parish feel about the clean air regulations. They support it, welcome it and cannot wait until it is on the statute books.

"Nor do we hear about how the incinerator needs to be built so the Government can create a green lung on Pembroke Dump.'' Mrs. Cartwright DeCouto claims that the National Trust knew about the Clean Air Act and had plenty of opportunity to contact Government with their views.

But she said: "We heard not a dicky bird.'' National Liberal Party Leader Mr. Gilbert Darrell maintains there is a wall between the two sides of the House of Assembly when it comes to debates like clean air policy.

Mr. Darrell said: "I hear members getting frustrated. There is a lot of talk and nothing is done. The United Bermuda Party closes ranks.

"There must be some way of getting together for the good of the country and for this Parliament, instead there is continual division.'' Mr. Darrell's point was that a select committee should be formed to debate the clean air policy before it reaches the House of Assembly so that all points of view can be discussed.

Concerning the National Trust, he said: "I was under the impression that the National Trust was a respectable body and the Government respected them. "We know there is no legislation that comes before this House without the UBP sitting down with the Bar Council, and nine times out of ten the Employers' Council and the Chamber of Commerce. There seems to a certain amount of bias.

"We have to be realistic about the five-year wait. Will we be waiting for five years while toxic poisons are still there? And while we are waiting for changes will people still be poisoned?'' Mr. Darrell called for Government to investigate new refridgerants that are not dangerous to public health which, he said, are available.

Shadow Minister of Community Affairs Mr. Reginald Burrows praised Belco for changes it has made over the past 20 years.

But Mr. Burrows said: "When the incinerator comes into production it is going to make the problems of Belco look like a Sunday school picnic.

"I am concerned about what kind of garbage is going to be burned in our mass burn incinerator.'' He asked how much of the waste that is now being recycled was initially destined for the incinerator.

The Environment Minister said he was surprised at the amount of discussion over a simple "housekeeping'' Act.

In reply to Mr. Darrell, Mr. Simons said that if a company was emitting toxic poison that was posing a danger to life and health it would be stopped. But other companies not posing any immediate danger would be given time to change.

He rejected the idea of joint select committee stating that the Government was in office "to govern.'' Concerning the National Trust Mr. Simons said: "It was only a matter of days ago that I was at the annual general meeting. I accepted an award that day for the work of the Government in creating the National Parks System.

"What surprised me was that no-one at the meeting raised any particular concern about the clean air regulations.'' Mr. Simons said that the public could consult him at any time over environmental issues and that new plant would have to be checked by a body similar to the Development Applications Board before they were allowed to do anything which would affect the Island's clean air.

He said: "The people living in Pembroke Basin are the principle beneficiaries of these regulations. It will improve the quality of life of the people living there.'' In committee, the Shadow Minister Mr. Hall said that Mr. Simons summing had finally explained to him what the Act was about.

He said: "Until seven minutes ago he had not explained the basic concept, that there was a need to set some kind of standard even though it is unattainable for the time being and that there should be some degree of flexibility.'' But then he accused the UBP of "Government by ambush'' which he said was unacceptable even in the most despotic of regimes.

Mr. Hall said that PLP would not oppose the Act and it was passed.