MPs Pass Motion To Overturn Waterfront Lease

March 9, 2014

Parliamentarians passed a Bill that resulted in the overturning of the 262-year lease the Corporation of Hamilton signed with Allied Development Partners for the City of Hamilton waterfront area.

The Municipalities Amendment Act 2014 passed on Friday [Mar 7] by a vote of 18 – 15, with all OBA MPs present voting in favour, while all PLP MPs present plus Independent MP Terry Lister voted against it.

Hamilton Harbour Bermuda generic 231

Clause 2 of the Bill — “Any agreement that is rejected by the Legislature under subsection [4] shall be void ab initio” — was the section that allowed for the lease to be overturned.

Following the passage of that Bill, Junior Minister of Home Affairs Sylvan Richards introduced a Motion to invalidate the lease the Corporation of Hamilton signed with Allied Development Partners.

That Motion passed by a margin of 18 – 14, with all OBA MPs present [Shawn Crockwell missed the vote] voting in favour, while all PLP MPs present [Michael Scott and Michael Weeks missed the vote] plus Independent MP Terry Lister voted against the motion.

The approval followed a heated debate in which multiple Opposition MPs criticised the government for bringing legislation to allow the Government to invalidate a lease.

The OBA MPs did not speak much on the measure, however Independent MP Terry Lister also spoke on the Motion saying he was “saddened” and “ashamed” by it.

Audio excerpt of MP Terry Lister’s speech:

In late 2012, the Corporation of Hamilton signed a lease with Allied Development Partners — which is headed by Alex DeCouto and Michael Maclean — as the City waterfront developers.

The City said, “The document gives the developers a 262-year lease on 26-acres of City waterfront between Barr’s Bay and the Department of Marine and Ports on Front Street.

“The long lease is in keeping with the leases given to 9 Beaches and Club Med and was necessary in order to attract institutional investors and secure the capital necessary to build a $1.7 billion infrastructure.”

Tweet from MP David Burt sent during the debate:

MP david burt tweet

Junior Minister Sylvan Richards cited the Ombudsman’s report [PDF], quoting a section that said: “If development of Hamilton Harbour is indeed a priority of the Corporation of Hamilton, Government and people of Bermuda, then ideally, we should start over.”

“I think that sums up what this Government is doing tonight,” said Mr. Richards.

In late 2013, Ombudsman for Bermuda Arlene Brock issued a report into the Corporation and the Waterfront Development in particular.

Ms Brock said the Request for Proposal [RFP] to award the 262 year lease for the Waterfront Development consisted of a 4 inch by 6 inch advertisement.

“In such circumstances, observers cannot help but suspect that the rules were being created to ensure that a certain participant wins. Transparency, accountability and fairness do not seem to be the CoH’s strongest suits,” said Ms Brock.

Citing “maladministration” and the Ombudsman’s report , Home Affairs Minister Michael Fahy announced in December 2013 that the Government will take control of the Corporation of Hamilton’s finances.

It resulted in all financial matters being carried out only upon the authorisation of the Minister of Home Affairs, including tendering, accounts receivable/payable, purchasing, and all other money management matters.

The Municipalities Amendment Act 2014 is below [PDF here]

Read More About

Category: All, News, Politics

Comments (105)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

Articles that link to this one:

  1. Minister: Corporation “Stewardship Notice” Lifted | | March 13, 2014
  1. Chingas Bye says:

    Mr. Burt you do remember what your party did to Bermuuda Cement Company owners, don’t you, so lets not make it seem like your party never did the same. Actually, what your party did was take the business out of the hands of someone that had done a great job, and handed it over to someone else. Friends and Family Favour #24?

    Why anyone would need a 262 year lease is beyond me, regardless of the investment or “proposed investment”. Now perhaps different interested parties can bid on the property. For those of you that have not seen any other proposals I suggest you do so before thinking that this 262 deal was the best option or the only one.

    Perhaps someone can provide the link to the one sponsored by Sir John. It was very well done and thought out.

    The thing that stood out to me about this groups proposal was the placement of a Casino on Whites Island. Didn’t the PLP lease that property to another PLP friend for 24 years? Even if it was available it would mean Ferrying people across to the island which during some days in the Winter isn’t very safe. Not to mention the fact that the public and tourists would need to rely on the Ferry and hope there wasn’t a last minute strike!

    • Jeez Louise says:

      More of the same – the PLP did it so its okay if the OBA do it. – Very weak.

      The OBA want that land to go to the “investors of their choice – worded differntly the investors who chose the OBA…make any sense? It won’t to you right now but when the lights turn on the lies come out.

      • Silence Do Good says:


        The land was returned to the CoH to manage and start the RFP process again. Maybe they can be more inclusive of the community with different stakeholder this time than the last process. Read the Ombudsman and tell me if you think this deal was in the best interest of Bermuda or facilitate correctly. The lands are still the CoH and the current administration can decide what is next. Remember the PLP wanted to turn the corporations into QUANGOs effectively taking away all municipal lands. The one thing that stop that was an election in December and the win party giving back rights and whrafage, ensuring good goverance moving forward.

        • Rich says:

          When has ‘Best interest of the Country’ been paramount? Self serving political decisions have been alive and well for centuries in Bermuda, as it has been throughout the world. To argue that this stuff was invented 15 years ago when the PLP assumed the reigns is an insult to most rationale peoples basic intelligence.

      • Hmmm says:

        Amazed that ALL the PLP voted against. WOW have they not been paying attention to things. Did they not listen or read the PLP appointed Ombudsmans report. WOW PLP , party before people AGAIN.

        Disgusted with the PLP again.

        • Mazumbo says:

          And de O.B.A/ubp supporters accused de P.L.P of being like Mugabe, well welcome to Zimbabwe.

          • Mike Hind says:

            Just like those UBP supporters that made this ridiculous claim, you have no idea what you’re talking about.
            This is absolutely nothing like Zimbabwe.
            Don’t do that.

            Two wrongs don’t make a right.

    • Me says:

      y do you constantly live in the past???????????????? Did ur mate say stop looking out the rare view mirror???

  2. Kim Smith says:

    The overturning of that bogus agreement is the right thing to do.

    • Tough Love says:

      Bogus? Since when is a LEGAL contract bogus? What’s ‘bogus’ is the fact that the government has now made a law where they can void a legal contract! This is something that Fidel Castro & Putin would do, yet we have the brainwashed people agreeing with this nonsense. If the contract was wrong, then take it to court! That’s what they are for, well in a democracy. But it’s looking more and more that Bermuda is no longer a democracy.

      • gram says:

        Numerous breaches were made in the entire contracting process. Have a read of the Ombudsman report if you need to see what actually went down… What makes you think it was legal?

  3. Kangoocar says:

    So, tell me again why Terry Lister is a independent member of the house??? He is plp all the way!!! Thank you OBA for righting just another of the plp wrongs!!! Also, to all those that voted against this law, you should be ashamed of yourselves, as you have proven once again you are putting your plp ahead of everything that is good for Bermuda!!! Shame shame shame on all of you!!! This along with many other things the plp have done since being the opposition proves they have learned NOTHING!!!!!

    • Beav says:

      Terry is trying to distance himself from the PLP whackos, that’s why he’s an independent. My guess is Burt will make a run for the leader of the PLP as he will distance himself from Beany once the poop hits the fan.

      • Rockfish #2 says:


        Burt no! My money is on Daniels.

        Burt surrounds himself with people who become orgasmic when he speaks, but do not pay attention to what he says.

        Daniels, on the other hand speaks factually and objectively without attempting to sound like an actor from one of Shakespeare’s plays.

        I note you haven’t mentioned the Deputy Leader.

      • New Party says:

        From an inside PLP source, I believe Terry is making great progress in getting MP’s from the PLP to join him in a NEW party as there are many who are embarrassed by recent statements of Marc Bean,

    • X man says:

      It simply stops him from being part of the follow the Party – no matter what they do club.- thus he can
      think and make decisions of his own account and not the Group.
      I sure many MP’s have had to make a decision of yes or no because there political party but didnt agree on it.

  4. daughter of the water says:

    thank goodness this has been overturned. the whole thing was nothing short of yet another pocket-lining scheme a la the ‘it’s our turn’ mentality…. scary. and thank goodness for the awareness and courage of arlene brock to stand up to it. the waterfront of hamilton belongs to the people. the plans that that group had would have obliterated front street as we know it, and we would have lost one of the most authentic and iconic parts of our bermuda. three cheers for arlene and three more cheers for the OBA for removing it.

    • Jeez Louise says:

      Why does the water fornt of Hamilton belong to the people? Can it not be private? Who gets to decide that? Is the Waterfront at Mid-Ocean also the Peoples? I’m sure many of the people who own waterfront property around the island would appreciate you showing up on their dock claiming that their property belongs to the People…

      • Jeez Louise says:

        Not attacking you personally here but in this “western civilization” private propery rights (love it or hate it) have to be respected – by you, me and governments especially – since governments comprise of you and me…

        • Hmmm says:

          The whole process behind this lease being granted stinks. If you can’t smell the stink, go see an ENT.

        • @ Jeez Louise – it is called the Queens bottom and this cannot be given without the consent of Govt – BTW was never done!!! Let alone the tender process was totally bogus and not above board.

  5. Smh says:

    Good thing the OBA will only be the Govt. for 1 term!!!

    • Kangoocar says:

      @smh, care to tell us your reasons this that this 262 yr lease would have been a good thing for us??? I can tell you the dreamers that okayed this lease and those that signed the lease between them could not develop a sand box a a day care center for children!!!! But go ahead and give me your reason why the OBA did not save us!!!!

    • jt says:

      Good for who?

    • Sara says:

      Don’t hold your breath. Like it or not, the changes that the OBA are making will help Bermuda and Bermudians get out of the mess we are in. Everyone will continue to b**** and moan over every decision made by them, but the bigger picture and outcome of all the little changes will speak for itself. And if Bermudians feel they are even 20% better off, they will be voting OBA again. That is why the PLP MPs are being so aggressive because they know time is limited.

  6. Truth (Original) says:

    Mr. Burt, a “private contract” concerning PUBLIC land is a matter of public importance. That contract was a farce and overturning it was the right thing to do.

    • daughter of the water says:


    • Jeez Louise says:

      How evactly is that land “public” do you know this for sure – again not against you here but I know not where there is a deed stating that this 26 acres is “public”

      I do not agree with the BS by the way but I think you are distorting the facts a bit here…

      • Silence Do Good says:


        CoH lands were granted by an act of legislation. The Corporations would not exist if the legislature did not will them into being and provide public lands for them to be stewards over. The Corportation are public bodies managing a municipal areas on a 21 square mile island with limits on what they can and can not do. Bermuda ports which are located in municipalities is of interest to all Bermudians as that is where most of our goods and tourist enter. Decission on developing waterfront in these public areas has many stakeholder most important are the people of Bermuda. What the government did may be the right thing to protect public lands other than using the Land Aquistion Act to strip the land away from the developer and COH at the same time. Remember they gave the back to CoH to continue to manage in our interest.

  7. CoH Dummies says:

    Now can we please dismantle that bogus Corporation of Hamilton Board! They are completely CLUELESS ! Particularly, Donal the dreamer, Graeme the clueless and Carlton!

    • Ian says:

      You sound like a communist..

    • Coffee says:

      Put a blindfold on and you’ll swear down those three man were on the jet to Washington .

      • HeyBye says:

        I hope they get more Private Jet rides, saving the tax payer money on travel expenses, promoting Bermuda business abroad.How can we select business partners, investments, etc if we we do not forge links with interested groups.
        What ever it takes to get the economy going, even that means hitching a ride on a private jet,so be it.
        Accepting the ride does not obligate Bermuda to anything.
        Making mountain out of a mole hill.
        PLP manufacturing distractions to kill time so that the Gov does not succeed before the next election.

    • young observer says:

      No respect.

      You get 20 likes for name calling.
      Shame on all of you.

  8. Ian says:

    Our sell out government once again living up to expectations set BEFORE the election. Congratulations UBP / John Swan & Co… The good ole boys got what the wanted once again at the expense of an opportunity held by an ambitious young black Bermudian. The spirit of old filth is back in full effect… So much for “Change”…

    • O'Brien says:

      Ian, the waterfront is public land. It is our national inheritance, the birthright of every Bermudian. And it was given away from under us as a 262 year lease without the slightest public consultation.

      The process will have to start over, and MacLean will have a chance to bid again like everyone else. But this time it has to be open and above board. The last time around it wasn’t. The Government didn’t even know the lease had been signed until they read it in the media for god’s sake.

      • Ian says:

        O’Brian, while I respect your diplomatic response and position, it insults the collective intelligences of many folk that will not be surprised when it is finally “determined” who will be the new developers. And what’s most detrimental about all of this is the message it sends to future potential investors who will find themselves looking into the political risks associated w doing business in Bermuda..

        • Just Wondering says:

          So then you are completely happy with how the corporation of hamilton conducted this bit of business? You feel that it is completely fine to hand over such a large amount of property for such a length of time to non-bermudians to do with as they please? You are fine that the public or Government were never told about this till after the deal was already signed?

      • Jeez Louise says:

        Good points all – but where can it be found that this area in Question is indeed PUBLIC land? I see John Smith Bay as public or Spittal Pond you see…how is this public yet I have to pay to park there…do you pay to camp at a beach or pay to park there?

        I really do not know so someone enlighten me with the FACTS – how is this land Public?

        • Anon Ymous says:

          There are absolutely Government fees to partake in certain activities on PUBLIC land / beaches. One prime example is your annual car licence to TCD for use of the PUBLIC highways.

          • Jeez Louise says:

            Yes but you not need to be liscenced to go to the beach or the park so to that effect roads are a hybrid no?

            • Hmmm says:

              To hold an event or private party at the beach you need a licence.

            • Anon Ymous says:

              Can you pitch a tent in Par-la-ville park? Again, public but not for the public to do with as they please…Can you have a bonfire or camp at the beach without a permit? No. An area can be public and still have rules & fees levied by the authority charged with it’s maintenance / management. I’m not saying the waterfront is or is not public property because I simply dont know for a fact but your reasoning isn’t valid.

    • Kangoocar says:

      Ian, you have no clue of what you speak, as a twenty something year old, I would suggest you not comment on things that cost over 10 grand!!! These dreamers who signed this lease! CANT AFFORD IT and have no way of doing it !!! End of story my friend!!!!

      • Ian says:

        Oh Kangoocar… So predictable with your typical personal attacks and deflections… all tragically lacking in substance. Most people start going senile around 70 if it strikes. You, my friend, are clearly pushing for youngest on record. Good for you! Your government is just as predictable as you are mate. A bunch of sell outs that better enjoy their one term…

        • Kangoocar says:

          Ian, I will say it for the last time to you, they CANT AFFORD IT!!! I know that factually, they have no chance of getting the financing!!! If you don’t know the facts, STFU, also don’t think for one second that I don’t know your agenda with mentioning the Morgans Point development, when one has to resort to race in an argument, they have already lost the argument!!! When you reach your mid 40′s you might have a clue ????

          • Ian says:

            I’m sure, given your past, you know exactly what role race has played on this island. So if you wish to dismiss that dynamic (historically) then by all means feel free. But that’s neither here nor there considering one of the Morgans Point boys is indeed a black man. So not really seeing your point. Perhaps is nap time old man!

            • Billy Mays says:

              Forget what’s best for the island; it’s all about race isn’t it? Brilliant.

            • Sandgrownan says:

              Race card! You fail

            • Hmmm says:

              Race is a weapon used by the PLP politicians to fuel divisiveness and gain support. Is has damaged Bermuda and created another generation of brainwashed supporters. As noted, the PLP are about their party above and beyond people, this country or your wellbeing.

              Whenever the PLP use race, you have got to realize you are being played. If the islands moving forward progresses, then the PLP lose their potential supporters. They want to hold the country back for their own profit IMO

              • Party first? says:

                “As noted, the PLP are about their party above and beyond people, this country or your wellbeing.”

                That’s actually enshrined in the PLP constitution.

      • Ian says:

        Funny btw how you don’t recognize that the Morgans Point boys are also “dreamers”, who in the absence of outside investment, CAN’T AFFORD it and have no way of doing it!

    • HeyBye says:

      Such an idiotic comment.Your lack of comprehending the magnitude of such an incredible under handed deal handing over part of Bermuda for over three generations. You have lapped up the Kool Aid.

      • Ian says:

        I find it interesting that for oba’ers, having someone dish them up a hard dose of realty, that is usually the result of simply observing the blatantly obvious dynamics in play on this little island, must be met with the Kool Aid line. It’s gotten to a point where those words have no power anymore and, ironical, your use of them and every other tired OBA mantra speaks to the OBA/ubp “Kool Aid” you folks get drunk on!

        • Mike Hind says:

          When have you ever done that?

          Seriously. When have you ever presented “a hard dose of reality”?

          • Question says:

            Wow – - I actually thought I would not see the day when this actually happened. Did my eyes just deceive me or did Mike Hind actually admit that he is a supporter of the OBA after years of saying that he is neutral and not for either party?

            My question is based solely on the two above comments from @Ian and @Mike Hind. Please read both comments and then you make up your own mind.

            Interesting indeed.


            • Hmmm says:

              I didn’t read that.

              Made up my own mind as you requested

            • Mike Hind says:

              No. I didn’t.

              You are making stuff up again.

              Stop that.

              Try an ounce of honesty. You’re ridiculous.

        • HeyBye says:

          Not mean’t to have power. It discribes the gullible PLP lemmings who follow hook line and sinker.All based on emotion,not logic nor reality.
          The Jim Jones method, cult like, to their own demise and taking the rest of Bda with them.

    • frank says:

      the next move casino at 141

  9. Legal Eagle says:

    Carlton is very good at driving around talking on his cell phone in his car……

  10. nuffin but the truth says:

    GOOD!..that was a friends n family agreement from the get go!

    • jt says:

      An election loss was not projected in the ‘development’ plans.

  11. Chris Famous says:

    Lease for Daniels head is how long?
    Lease for Daniels head is how far behind in payments?
    lease for Daniels head is held by whom?

    Is the OBA trying to break that lease as well?

    • Triangle Drifter says:

      If the holders of that lease are not honouring their comitment I hope so. Right now everyone is marking time waiting on the next election. You can bet that there is no one beating down any doors wanting to take over Deniels right now especially with the labour events of the past few weeks.

      If the OBA is thrown out investors will be running even more to places like Cayman. Welcome to the new Haiti of the north.

    • feel the love says:

      Go away Mr Famous. Nobody cares what you have to say. Perhaps buy some property in St. Kitts…

    • Unbelievable says:

      If you’re talking about 9 Beaches, Mazumbo, then you’re wrong. AGAIN.

      the place is empty, derelict and out of business. Your team never did anything about it in the first place.

    • Rockfish #2 says:

      Can we have all details of the Stonington Beach/Webb/Jefferies saga?

    • jt says:

      Do you think they should?

    • frank says:

      the daniels head lease involves their friend david oh they gave him a job

      • Fact Killer says:

        The lease to 9 Beaches was granted by the PLP to Dodwell and Co. who was also made Chairman of the PLP’s Tourism Board.

        I agree with Famous tho. I believe the Government should closely review/scrutinize all contracts and leases issued by the PLP Government in their last 5 years or so in power.

  12. Triangle Drifter says:

    Finally! Sanity on The Hill. Well done. Check one more off the list of horrendous PLP blunders. Now, is there a way to run the circus out of town?

  13. Build a Better Bermuda says:

    I have no doubt that this legislation was written for the intent of quashing the lease… and I have no problem with that. The process that lead to the lease was so monumentally flawed and biased, it deserved to be quashed. The proposal for the development of our Waterfront was so grotesque, it would have irrepairably ruined Front Street. I look forward to an open and transparent RFP this time around, and raise hell if it isn’t. Mr. DeCouto and Mr. Maclean are welcome to resubmit their proposal, but they ought to prepare for competition… and they might want to ditch the notion of burying Front Street behind pier after peir of multi story buildings that the market has absolutely no support for. Should we ever hit another office space boom again, like pre 2007, there is currently an abundance of empty space available and more than enough old buildings that could be redeveloped to meet the demand for time to come, without commercializing space that needs to reflect the beauty of our island. Any proposal should be for Bermudians first, should be a landmark, something that can be iconic to Bermuda, and a wall of office building won’t do that.

  14. Insurance Lawyer says:

    In all the Annual Reports and 10K Filings submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission and of course shareholders every major US listed Bermuda insurance company must include a Risk Disclosure Statement or factors that increase the risks to the company in Bermuda, we have just made it more difficult for us to attract foreign investment.

    Risk Factors are now:

    1) Exempted Undertakings protection Act only extended to March 2035;

    2) Potential for labour unrest associated with trade Unions;

    3) In 2014 Government enacted landmark legislation to overturn and void private commercial contracts, this means any contracts involving foreign capital can be cancelled with no established recourse or compensation for overseas investor groups.

    My comments are factual, not political, and solely to show frustration at lawmakers who have now made it harder for me to sell Bermuda as a domicile for captive, licensed class 4s, SPIs and ILS market.

    Very negative development for Bermuda.

    Insurance Lawyer

    • Hmmm says:

      It is a Public Private agreement ….and you are a lawyer?… I think the context of the lease and the manner with which it was awarded makes this decision a positive in international circles.

      I think you’ll find the government has been working well with the unions. It isn’t perfect, but there has been nothing more than, what happened under the last govt.

    • Kangoocar says:

      With all due respect I have to ask, do you not think Bermuda would have been a harder sell for you if it was seen by them that this government was letting a development surrounded in malfeasance to carry on?? Also this development would not have gotten off the ground anyway and all it was doing was getting in the way of something that could happen!! I happen to think outside investors would be more willing to invest their big $$$$$ in a place that is seen to be above board!!

    • Bermyluv says:

      Governments all around the world have the power to void contracts and leases, or to confiscate or to force compulsory sale of property and assets.

    • Jeez Louise says:

      Most companies File 10K’s in February – this law was just passed in March – how could section three of you post have been included in a risk disclosure statement?

    • Jeez Louise says:

      Just read your post again and looked at some 10K’s filed…I realized then that these risk factors were made up by you – I agree with you btw I just needed to be sure that these facts were your opinion?! How twilight zone was that last remark (these facts were your opinion)

      Should have realized it when you said

      Risk Factors are now:

      Very well done with your “wording”…I was almost fooled.

  15. Rick Olson says:

    Exactly the plan was such a pie in the sky idea nothing ever would of ever even got off the ground.

  16. Sad says:

    Why is it not surprising that the PLP is defending a blatantly…. CoH administration and their giftig of BDA land under suspicious circumstances. Reminds me of the Coco Reef lease.

    And why is Chris Famous defending the gifting of our land to unknown foreign investors for nearly 300 years? Isn’t he the one that persistently rails against foreigners and allowing them to scoop up BDA property? Why is this transaction exempt from your daily rantings Famous?

    • Chris Famous says:

      Can you show me where I defended anything?

      In my only comment on the matter ,I pointed out the hypocrisy of Daniels Head, and the lease holder owning Government major money whilst their lease not being challenged.

      • Hmmm says:

        So Chris, do you think the way in which the lease process was conducted was fair, right and a good thing for all Bermuda and Bermudians ?

  17. San George says:

    There will be consequences for this. The government is going to have to pay these men ransom. That will be taxpayers money. Stay tuned!

  18. lucky 7 says:

    Another Victory for the OBA!! Keep going guys! :)

  19. verbal kint says:

    What does Minister Crockwell’s absence for the vote say? There seem to be two factions in each party, and at present, about 5 people vying to run the Island. Loyalties seem to be EXTREMELY convoluted.

    • 1minute says:

      That he might on been in the batthroon when time was called to lock the Chambers doors.

  20. Alvin Williams says:

    One thing is for sure this would not have been an issue if the old regime was still in charge of city government.
    The current administration has been the subject of a witch hunt and constant criticism almost from day one.
    one does not have to imagine the reaction if the former PLP government had gone as far as this government has in it’s determination to curtail the administrative power of the former city government. In fact we have the proof of marches and demonstrations that were mounted over long over due democratic reforms of the city government; but as to this grievous naked curtailment of the administrative powers of the current city government we do not hear a peep or voice of opposition from those that were so concern during the period of the reign of the former city government.

    • Facts are Facts says:

      That’s because the old administration would not have gifted our land to some unknown foreign investor under a non-transparent RFP. And if they had any intention of doing so then why didn’t they? It is not like they didn’t have ample time to do so with the time they were in power.

      Have you read the Ombudsman’s report on the matter? What are your thoughts on the issues raised with the process as a whole?

      Strange that someone like yourself, who professes to be pro-Bermudian, has no qualms about giving away the public’s most prized real estate to unknown foreign investors for the better part of 300 years. But I guess it just matters to you who is doing the ‘gifting’ huh?

      One last question, what do you think about the numerous shenanigans undertaken by this CoH adminsitration since their ascent to power?

    • jt says:

      Witch hunt? Please. Brooms, pointy hats and magic wands make witches easy to spot. No hunt required.

      I doubt the previous noise of which (not witch) you speak would have been muted, if not absent, had the COH at the time acted like this one.

      Jumping off from your post, it is interesting that you point out previous discontent which is now non-existent. Kind of the flip side of 14 years of silence followed by what we hear now.

  21. clearasmud says:

    Nobody can argue with the fact that the present administration at the CoH leave a lot to be desired however how would any investor have faith in doing business with a government that can later pass a law make it retroactive and cancel what was a legitimate legal process! This is worrying if we are trying to attract foreign investment because it sends the wrong message!

  22. Jeez Louise says:

    Can someone on here please detail for me how this land is Public? I really don’t know – Mike Hind Kangoocar – I notice you guys on here more than most so maybe you know more than most can you please elaborate for me how this 26 acres is public land?

    • Hmmm says:

      It is not Privately owned, that is how it is Public land

      • Hmmmmm says:

        It is owned by the Corporation of Hamilton. It is NOT public land.

        • Triangle Drifter says:

          And that does not mean that it is owned by the lot who currently sit around the table at City Hall either.

  23. Looking in says:

    Now let the real boys play!

  24. 1minute says:

    The lease was void from the begining as the were leasing items that did not belong to them. When I looked at the plan it included a building owned by HSBC, White Island which is Government owned and leased for the next 20 years or so. Plus they were to build into the harbour would also need Government approval, which they didn’t have.

  25. enough says:

    Who does own this land? Graeme Outerbridge? Donal Smith?

  26. Tough Love says:

    Why wasn’t this settled in court? Why did the government just “waive the law” and make up their own law to void a legal contract? This doesn’t make sense. Agree or disagree with the contract, Government shouldn’t have done this. We are on a slippery slope.

    • HeyBye says:

      Why waste the precious time and tax payer money to end up with the same result? So much on the agenda from 14 years of mis management.

      As mentioned before, all gov’s have the power to appropriate/rescind.

  27. Looking in says:

    The poverty party trying to persuade us the OBA are bad!