OBA & PLP On Salary Reductions
[Updated] One Bermuda Alliance MPs and Senators have agreed to take a 5% salary cut effective March 1, 2012, but do not support the plan to forego pension contributions, Opposition Leader Craig Cannonier said this evening [Feb.12].
“We will set up an escrow account into which we will put 5% of our parliamentary salaries on a monthly basis. We will contribute these funds to charity until the Premier sorts out her Government’s course of action,” said Mr Cannonier.
“After careful consideration and having had the chance to talk with members of the community, we do not support the plan to forego pension contributions over the next year for both the civil service pension fund and the pension fund for Ministers and Members of Parliament.”
Mr Cannonier cited a number of reason they are not in support suspending pension contributions, and also reiterated the OBA’s position that Cabinet Ministers should take a 10% pay cut, not 5%.
“Failing to support the civil service pension fund for a year is a raid on the future and it’s not right,” Mr Cannonier said. “It will create a ‘deficiency’ that will more likely affect younger taxpayers.”
On Thursday [Feb.9] Premier Paula Cox said that Ministers and Government MPs are prepared to accept a one year cessation of pension contributions, as well as a 5% salary decrease. She wrote to Mr Cannonier to ask if Opposition MPs would be willing to do the same.
Mr Cannonier responded that night, saying the OBA will agree to a 5% cut for MPs and Senators plus a one-year suspension of pension contributions if Cabinet Ministers agree to a 10% pay cut and suspend their use of credit cards and expense accounts.
The day after Mr Cannonier’s reply, PLP MP Walter Roban said, “The OBA once again show their true face as opportunists less interested in the public good than in their own political agenda.”
Mr Roban said the initiative was designed to “have a positive effect on government revenue,” and said the intention was “shattered by an irresponsible Opposition.”
“The Government seeks to work with our union partners as the Opposition seeks to deviously divide. OBA Politics is not politics of the people, it is politics of opportunism,” said Mr Roban.
Both UBP MPs – Kim Swan and Charlie Swan – have agreed to the Premier’s proposed reduction in salaries.
Mr Roban’s full statement follows below:
The OBA once again show their true face as opportunists less interested in the public good than in their own political agenda. They are more keen on increasing their fortunes in politics and their pockets to the detriment of the public good.
On February 9, 2012, the Premier Hon. Paula A. Cox JP MP informed the Opposition that “…Government members in the Legislature are prepared to accept similar arrangement which would for a period of one year involve a cessation of pension contributions…with a reduction in gross salary…”. Added with that, “…Ministers and Government Members were prepared to accept an additional decrease in their salaries of 5%.”
We are all aware of the economic challenges and the difficulties of many people in the community. This initiative was clearly put forward to make sure we all would be making real steps to have a positive effect on government revenue as we work together to reach the goals of job stability and revenue stabilising. Not symbolism but real substance. Everyone here contributes to making the sacrifice for the benefit of all.
This intention has been shattered by an irresponsible Opposition and we know why. They really thought the government members would never do it and would have it as a whipping stick during the Budget. The offer by the Government members dashed their hopes.
So what do they do? Use media sensationalism to give their reply to the Premier and reject the proposal. An act of good governance is stained by a disgraceful political maneuver. The public will see the OBA effort for what it is – a cheap political parlour trick!
The Government seeks to work with our union partners as the Opposition seeks to deviously divide. OBA Politics is not politics of the people, it is politics of opportunism.
The Opposition One Bermuda Alliance will continue to relish gloom, doom and disunity. They sadly seek to make political points to the country’s detriment.
Government Ministers and backbenchers should be credited for making the choice to stand with workers to make a sacrifice for the public good. A sacrifice for all Bermuda.
-
Mr Cannonier’s full statement follows below:
It is apparent that a lot of people are confused by Premier Paula Cox’s pay and pension cut proposals.
As the Opposition, we have limited options to work with, but we will do what we believe is the right thing to do.
OBA MPs and Senators have agreed to take a 5% salary cut, effective March 1, 2012.
We will set up an escrow account into which we will put 5% of our parliamentary salaries on a monthly basis. We will contribute these funds to charity until the Premier sorts out her Government’s course of action.
After careful consideration and having had the chance to talk with members of the community, we do not support the plan to forego pension contributions over the next year for both the civil service pension fund and the pension fund for Ministers and Members of Parliament.
Here’s why:
- The Government is proposing to break a promise to help workers build a safe and secure fund for their retirement. That promise should not be violated.
- If the current proposal to the unions goes through, the government workers pension fund will lose more than $60 million in contributions this year – $30 million in worker contributions and $30 million in the 8% matching contributions from Government.
- Although the Government has cleverly softened its 8% pay cut proposal to union members by proposing to forgive their normal 8% pension deduction, the net result is will keep more than $60 million that is supposed to go to building pensions for government employees. The Government will put it toward other government spending. It’s simply more debt in another form.
- Failing to support the civil service pension fund for a year is a raid on the future and it’s not right. It will create a ‘deficiency’ that will more likely affect younger taxpayers.
- The government workers pension funds are already underfunded and, by law, any deficit must be covered by the taxpayer – or in the medium term through potentially higher contribution rates by both government and its employees. This already happened once in 2006 when government raised the contribution rate from 5% to 8%.
- A one-year pass on pension contributions will not alter the Government’s serious financial problems. It will only push the problem further down the road. Indeed, there is no reason to believe the same situation will not rear its head again next year.
It is important to remember that these pay and pension cut proposals are being driven by significant shortfalls in the Premier’s impending budget. They have nothing at all to do with making things better for working families.
What we are watching is a last-minute scramble for access to pension monies to make the Budget look better than it is and to hide the truth about the Government’s terrible financial situation. It is very cynical exercise to buy time and to help the Government avoid any hard decisions in an election year.
The Government is, in effect, asking working Bermudians to pay for its mistakes, from the many building projects that went tens-of millions of dollars over budget, to the many millions spent each year on consultants (nearly $100 million in 2010 alone).
The net result of those mistakes is our $1.2 billion debt and $70 million annual interest charges – some $90,000 every day. That’s money that must go to pay the Government creditors before anything else. This is the difficult position the Government has put us in, and now the Premier is asking working Bermudians to foot the bill.
Finally, we reiterate our position that Cabinet Ministers should take a pay cut of 10%, not the 5% proposed by the Premier. Again, here’s why that’s important:
- Cabinet ministers are the Government. They are responsible for all its decisions and for overseeing the consequences of those decisions. It is imperative that they lead by example.
- Otherwise, the Government is asking workers to take more of a pay cut than its own Cabinet Ministers. No political party should ask people to do something that its leaders are not prepared to do themselves.
Bermudians have to ask themselves whether they are willing to subsidize the Government’s scheme and let it off the hook, or force it to face up to the consequences of its actions.
-
Update: The PLP released a follow up statement, it follows in full below:
The choice between the PLP and the OBA is clear. PLP MPs and Ministers are ready to take a 17.5% reduction in their total compensation. OBA MPs are only willing to take a 5% cut.
No matter how much Craig Cannonier, Grant Gibbons and the rest of the OBA try to wiggle out of it, they still believe that members of the PLP should take a bigger cut in salaries than they are willing to take.
Finally the PLP has one question: How much of a reduction is the Opposition Leader ready to take? We find it very interesting that he would call on others to take more of a reduction than he is willing to take himself.
Right on OBA – the fact that you will contribute to a charity until “the Cog” sorts thing out is a good move on the part of the OBA. If only the PLP could get things and themselves together!
OK Cancer, AKA OBA’s #1 Bernews cheerleader. Just so you know, the PLP has already said what they’ll do, and as usual the OBA rejects something good to play politics. So lets see, they take 5% of their March salaries, and in April they have their salaries cut as the PLP will move forward with Kim and Charlie Swan.
Here is the big question. Will they KEEP giving their 5% ($2500) to charity AFTER April 1? My guess is no, so all this is just a PR stunt. “Look at us, we’ll do it a month before the PLP does it!”
As the country cries out for leadership, the OBA give us PR Stunts.
easy blood.. it aink that much they actually giving..
mps make 50,000 per annum
or roughly 1000 per week
5% of that is 50 bucks per week
so lets see yu have how many mps?
10
10 mps @ 50 bucks a week
500 per week
500x 4 weeks is 2000
so you all are patting yourselves on the back for donating 2000 bux
from some of the richest persons in bermuda
yea i know i left out the senators
so lets say 2500 max?
wow your generosity never ceases to amaze me
EXACTLY!
OBA as usual are up to tricks.
I don’t get how Craig Cannonier get’s off telling people to take a bigger cut than he is willing to take.
If you are a leader, you should be willing to take the same. How can you really say, I’ll take 5, but YOU take 10!
These lot are clueless.
??? He is willing to take the cut…he proposed it!
Then why is he telling the PLP to take 10% when he only wants to take 5%.
Do you read or merely respond? The OBA is saying Cabinet Ministers, not all MPs, should take 10% cut as they make the decisions.
But he’s not willing to take 10% himself…. Exactly
Why should he? He is not a Cabinet Minister. What you should be asking is why should an MP take 5% cut off a salary of about $58,000 and yet a Cabinet Minister also takes 5% off a salary of $168,000?
He said Cabinet Ministers should take 10%, you know, the one’s who formulate policy, not MP’s. Anyway, when the creditors stop lending to Bermuda next year, the choice will no longer be ours… 1,000 forced redundancies and 30% pay cuts all round. Regardless of who wins the election, this is what will happen when the credit line is maxed out and falling due. Unavoidable, unless we find a way to create new foreign revenue inflows. Any ideas anyone? Anyone? And I’m talking about increasing revenues for the country, not increasing taxes on the current revenues, which only serves to drive revenue elsewhere.
What is your idea for diversification of the economy ie alternative revenue streams?f What are your ideas?
I believe that the combined foreign revenues from Tourism, IB and Real Estate can still give Bermuda the lifeblood it needs, but, and it would appear to be a big BUT… we have to listen to what the players in those markets are telling us their businesses need, and then do it.
And let me be clear, by ‘do it’, I don’t mean forming a committee to look into hiring a relative to eventually produce an expensive report that will never be made public. I mean actually pass the laws and get it done, within a reasonable timeframe.
Additional diversification would of course be great, and prudent, but I really believe that if we just listened to our current revenue generators, we could at least stop the haemoraging that we’re suffering now as a result of the doctor simply not listening effectively to the patients.
Legalize cannabis. That will bring in lots of revenue – to the Gov’t – not the street dealer who gets it all now!
CUZ WHO PUT US IN THIS MESS IN THE FIRST PLACE? TAKE THE SHAME.
They bankrupted the country and your’e wondering about petty percentages to placate the sheep?
Uh, didn’t Paula Cox ask the civil service to take 8% when she only offered to take 5%?
If by your math premier cox asked civil servants to take a 8% reduction and she’s offered an 17.5% reduction. Whats your problem.
Stop confusing the issue.
No, the premier offered to offset 12.5 percent of the 17.5 percent “pay cut” by not deducting the 12.5 percent pension contribution. That leaves only 5 percent that could be called a true pay cut, i.e., 5 percent less in take-home pay for MPs. Stop confusing the issue.
OBA, here is a clue.
Don’t call on people to lead by example and cut 10%, if you yourself aren’t willing to follow that lead!
If you aren’t willing to do it yourself, stop asking others to do it.
so dude are you in any position to tell the government anything?
your 5% is being cut not put where you wanna put it
Oh for goodness sakes! Agree to the blasted paycut and stop trying to score political points. Its always got to be a bunch of bickering. You are losing the swing voters by the minute.
The OBA Parliamentary salaries will be cut 5 percent on march 1–by the OBA. What do you not understand about that? They have serious reservations about the implications of taking millions of dollars from the pension funds to save the Premier’s behind and making the country’s finances look better than they really are, and letting the young people of Bermuda pay the price for the PLP’s mistakes. What do you not understand about that? This doesn’t have anything to do with political points. The PLP is gonna do what the PLP wants to anyway.
I never said it was about the PLP. That is your hang up. Seems a lot of people on theses blogs are more focused on “death to the PLP” rather than whether the OBA is able to govern this country. Sorry my vote will have to be earned, not given just because. Looks like the independents may have a shot.
A vote for the plp is like a turkey voting for thanksgiving
We bankrupted the country, got rid of tourists, ran off the
international business, ran off small businesses, stood by
and watched Bermudian children kill each other, ‘went over
budget’ on every major government construction project,
and….and..and.. any alternative to stop the bleeding.
Like I said, my vote will have to be earned.
Craig you really are clueless. Bob save us from this man so he can go back pumping gas. It’s still not to late to beat PEE L PEE. He will cost us the election when it comes down to thinking smart. I’m not voting for Donald Duck. Every time I attend a meeting I’m afraid to speak up. Stop wasting time and find and excuse to put him on the side lines.
It’s a b c not a c e. Craig you skip to much and I’m getting tired of smiling in your face.
Craig’s just singing from the playbook that Grant Gibbons writes for him. Don’t get mad at him, he’s just doing what he’s told.
this will be about 300 remarks by 2moro this tyme
The most recent OBA response is curious at best.
If they are agreeing to a 5% pay cut, they will receive less pay. Thus the comment about putting 5% into an escrow account may not be relevant, unless they are trying to demonstrate that they are taking an effective 10% pay cut.
The bigger point is that they do not appear to be acting in accordance with Bob Richards’ recent comments. The Consolidated Fund needs to reduce the level of expenditure and the Premier’s plan to impact gross salaries and pension contributions is a good paln to achieve that outcome.
For any serious economic observer, this latest OBA response confirms that the OBA are more focussed on political expediency rather that doing what is best for Bermuda. At some point Mr. Cannonier and his team will realise that Bermuda deserves better at this crucial economic period in our development.
I will wait for further comments from the OBA to indicate why they have failed to ‘put their money where their mouths are at this crucial time.
Once again the budget debate cycle will be very interesting.
PLP want to steal from our future. To pay for their many many mistakes. Get over it . PLP need to leave office and return in the future as a party that has learned from past mistakes rather than one that is still making them and not taking resposibility. Pension fund robbery costs the taxpayer down the road. It does not cost the MPs anything. It is desperation from a clueless party. PLP are desperate and are looking for anything to distract the public. Condos, lights, personal defamation suits, SDOs Dickyard, police building,Berkley school, Carifta games kids out, schools, teacher licensing, trust fund………and on and on
To them it is about them and not Bermuda and most certainly not you!
2 interesting and contrasting announcements. The PLP comes out with an attack by backbencher Walter Roban, accusing the OBA of cheap politics when in fact that is exactly what he is doing. Doesn’t look good when a backbencher is the spoksperson, and why not have a statement from the Premier/Minister of Finance with the details of this proposal? As the OBA says, there is a lot of confusion so when they say from March 1 they will be doing something, when will the PLP do something? The devil is in the details and it would appear that the PLP are confused with how to implement this reduction in pension contributions. If raiding the pension fund for short term budgetary reasons is good for the country, I can’t wait to see what would be considerd bad. I guess that the Premier can’t take the political risk of going to the House to raise the debt ceiling as this would broadcast the problems, assuming she could borrow any more anyway.
The country’s rating is something like AA- so the country definitely has the ability to borrow. Without a problem. If it wanted to. But I don’t think the appetite is there.
Interesting that just this weekend, Greece announced it will cut civil service jobs by 20% and the minimum wage by 20% to keep its economy from bankruptcy.
Civil service cuts are the answer: Offer early retirement / part time work ? Yofu’d be surprised how many would take it.
The OBA response is completely understandable. The Premier’s suggestion would have meant, effectively, a 5% reduction for MPs. The rest, as the OBA pointed out, involved no personal ‘sacrifice’ at all; it was just postponing the cost of the pension.
The OBA is taking a 5% reduction right now, by putting 5% in escrow to be donated to charity. And they also suggest a simple 10% salary reduction for MPs, as they have been suggesting for a year or so.
Of course, the PLP won’t want to do that. It would reduce the amount the MPs actually get to take home, and as we know a lot of the government MPs are blatantly in it for the money.
You must be an OBA politician as you are explaining more that what is in that confusing letter above.
Thanks for the clarity, its refreshing that we can come on the Bernews to get you to explain Craig’s gibberish.
So when you say thanks for the clarity, does that mean you now agree with what Cannonier is proposing?
@ Rick Rock
The Premier’s proposal involves 2 areas of ‘sacrifice’. A 5% salary reduction for MPs and a loss of one year’s service as a parliamentarian.
Therefore there is no additional cost to the pension liability as a result of the proposal.
2 more points
1 – Cannonier admitted on Friday that the OBA did not think of the pension option.
2 – the goal is to reduce the Consolidated Fund expenditure.
The Premier’s proposal is estimated to save $64m. What is the estimated savings from the OBA plan? Bermuda needs everyone to think of the big picture and not be narrowly focussed on ‘political one upmanship.’
Oh Please , 1.3 BILLION debt , PLP , time to go.
The problem, Vote For Me, is that the ‘loss of one year’s service as a parliamentarian’ means absolutely nothing at all to the individual. The MP gets his full MP pension regardless. Therefore the ONLY purpose of that part of the Premier’s proposal is to put off pension funding until the future.
Vote for Me, why does the Premier need to reduce the Consolidated Fund expenditure? Because she needs to come up with the $70million to pay off the annual interest on the whopping debt she’s racked up. She needs to pay off Bermuda’s creditors before she can pay for anything else.So you think she should “raid the future” to pay for her mistakes?
Agreed. YOu have to also consider that capital market expectations have to be captured in here. By simple not to dramatic changes to the funds asset allocation structure, the performance of the fund can be enhanced to compensate for a year of reduced contributions.
So there is a shortfall of 12.5% for the MP pension and a short fall of 16% for the civil service pension – so this is the minimum annual return that these funds would need to make to stay level (let’s not forget it is already underfunded, so we are compounding this short-fall by freezing contributions).
Good luck with that.
The 411, you are incredibly naive. You have no experience of capital markets at all. If it were a just a question of ‘simple not to (sic) dramatic changes’ don’t you think they would already have done that?
The suggested non-contribution to pension funds just compounds the shortfall that exists already, and ensures that at some point in the future making up the shortfall is going to be more expensive, painful, and difficult.
In the meantime, Cox is hell bent on short-term measures to cling to power, and she’s not above the idea of lying through her teeth to mislead the masses. Like her old boss, she doesn’t mind ‘deceiving us because she has to’. Some of us can see through it, but apparently there a plenty of ‘party faithful’ who will never accept the plain truth.
Well, unless I’ve missed an amendment somewhere… There is no provision in the Public Service Supreannuation Act for the Minister of Finance to Suspend contributions. She will need to ammend the act to do so…. kind of like when she up’d the duty at the airport then realized she couldn’t (then blamed the software in the automated machines)
So does this mean that any company that is feeling the financial crunch can stop paying into their employees pensions as well? Our G’ment is setting a precedent which could be a slippery slope.
speaking of laws… I quite like this one that snuck buy Last March…..
http://www.bermudalaws.bm/Laws/Consolidated%20Laws/Government%20Loans%20(Suspension%20of%20Annual%20Contribution%20to%20Sinking%20Fund)%20Order%202010.pdf
Which reads:
Suspension of annual contribution to sinking fund without interest
The contribution to the sinking fund for the financial year 2009-2010, which would otherwise be payable under section 12(2) of the Government Loans Act 1978, shall be suspended for a period of twelve months without incurring the interest which would otherwise be payable under section 12(4) of that Act.
Look for a duplicate this year!!!!
Sadly, moojun is correct. Also, this is the standard case of every matter getting politicized to the detriment of everyone. It basically a symbolic cut. Let each side do it as they wish, as long as it’s legal. That keep it from being a pi**ing contest. My thinking is that Roban was chosen as the front man for this because he is already “toast”, so he can take the heat for people who have more to lose than him.
Finally, Walter Roban has SOME gall calling anyone an opportunist, or accusing someone else of putting political agendas above the good of the people.
I think Walter Roban is looking for some street cred with the faithful. He certainly needs it if he is looking to get back into Cabinet for the extra $100,000 pay he will receive.
$112k extra a year
Rick Rock you explained it very well. People can’t understand that the OBA is not asking parliamentarians to take any more of a cut than what the OBA is willing to take. Parlaimentarians will lose five percent of their paycheck but this lost will actually be made up by them not having to contribute to their pensions. It is MPs that make the big bucks and why shud they not give up a further five percent (which makes 10 percent) as they are the ones that destroyed the country in he first place. However with them not having to contribute to their pension they still would be taking home more money! Makes no sence to me. As long as plp take home more money than anyone else I guess it’s okay!
Cancer, i wasn’t aware you were so uniformed. Now i see how clueless you really are.
Keep on blogging for the OBA
Cancer etc are all a part of a planned effort to perpetuate pro obaubp talking points ie, please leave, 1.3 billion, etc.). Why do you think that they are the first to post here on the gazette. They have consistently shifted smears from prem smith, to prem scott, to prem brown to prem cox. They’re anger is not at these leaders or even at the PLP but at their black neighbors who vote PLP. It’s just easier and sneakier to blame the leader rather than confront their fellow bermudian.
Real Talk, last time I looked this was Bernews, not the RG. Are you for real? Anger at black neighbors? Really?? I pity the small, hateful world you live in. SMH.
Absolute nonsense. And a crass assumption.
“We will set up an escrow account into which we will put 5% of our parliamentary salaries on a monthly basis. We will contribute these funds to charity until the Premier sorts out her Government’s course of action,” said Mr Cannonier.
This is not a pay cut this is a charity fund which I would have thought the big rollers on plp & oba would have set up anyway if they really cared. This is not relative to helping the economy unless its going to charities that help the struggling Bermudian community or environment. For all I know the charity could be, “Keep OBA members rich charity.” Why not disperse with all fluffy show ponying & take a straight pay cut like plp? Mr. Cannonier you better come up with something better than this. PLP & OBA have both failed to fully impress me.
Mr. Cannonier you need to let your other members get up & speak once & a while since they may have more constructive ideas. This is not the U.S. presidential election process here in Bermuda. Your a team of shadow ministers so all tell us what you will do if not in the shadows anymore.
How is this not a pay cut when they will be getting 5 percent less in their take-home pay? Until the PLP government passes legislation during the new session, there is no legal way for the government to take the money out of their pay (“a straight pay cut” per you). So the OBA is taking the money out in advance–doing what they can do now–to set an example. I’m sure there are plenty of charities around that have had their government funding reduced and would love to get some help.
How can it be proved as a pay cut if its not 5% less they receive instead its a theoretical 5% that we intrust they are putting in a suitable charity. Government doesn’t need to take the money out to be (“a straight pay cut” per me). Just as other private businesses here have chose to pay their staff a percentage less OBA can choose to earn 5% less. If they could show where there 5% is going in a charity depending on the charity I would agree its a step in the right direction but at the moment they have not.
Wait for it. Soon come.
I think the programmes the OBA are talking about are the Sunshine League, the Mirrors Program, the Sally Ann, and all the other social assistance programs and charities for which your PLP/BIU Gov’t have CUT THE FUNDING.
We can all think like poo bear & think, think, think & tap our heads as we think or OBA could just list the charities out straight & then later show us that they really are giving to Bermudian community profiting charities.
BTW I’m not for PLP/BIU or OBA. I used to be for UBP a while back but they just couldn’t keep it together so I now stand on the wall & look for intelligent solutions from any which way. I realize your an OBA supporter star man. How does it feel to route solely for a team thats never got its cleats dirty? The grass always looks greener but is it really.
Fairly well put Tommy…….it does sound like “Keep OBA members rich charity.” Why not disperse with all fluffy show ponying & take a straight pay cut like plp?”
Please don’t twist my words specialgirl4you I did typed could be, “Keep OBA members rich charity.” not that it definitely is. I like the idea of helping charity but want to know if thats really going to happen & how & not put my faith in it like the poor put their faith in mother teresa in india or like people who put their faith in ewart brown.
@Tommy,…..It was not an attempt to spin your words,,,,,, however I do questions if the OBA/UBP are attempting to build a rich charity for members only and if it will truly be used for the purpose they stated it would?
No problem specialgirl I just did not want others to get my words skewed.
Than again the illiterate & nonsensical seem to skew my words no matter how specific & descriptively I try to explain my view.
Your logic is extraordinary. The OBA will take 5 percent from their pay to give it back to themselves? One of the more ridiculous postings you’ve made.
“Keep OBA members rich charity.” Are you serious?!
BTW, the continuing personal attacks by PLP/BIU Party supporters/paid bloggers show us all where your heads are at and your true intent. To spin, to misdirect… and, of course, live in the bad ol’ past.
@Tommy Chong. Once again you are spot on.
Real talk this is not a black vs white issue or smear campaign this is about facts and the way the PLP have led this country – debt – unethical behavior (some allege corruption) – deceiving the people – unfriendliness to international business along with flipPLoP policies. Cant even get anyone to invest in a hotel here – yet in Mexico where their are daily killings, drugs, cartels and corruption, over 100 new hotels are being built. Why is that? Someone please explain…. Sorry but PLP has lost their way.
As soon as the PLP/BIU Party is history you’ll see hotels being built here.
Which, of course, means JOBS!
Due to the reputation the Brownites created (10% off the top), some of whom are still in positions of power, NO HOTELS will EVER be built in Bermuda as long as they remain the government.
So if you need a good job, you know who to vote for. The OBA.
If this is not “political posturing”, all MPs should take a cut in the best interest of Bermuda. I would have expected Mr. Richards to be the leader, and proposed a higher cut in salaries of at least 15 to 20% based upon his recent talks regarding government’s need to cut-back. Now is a good opportunity for all MPs to stand up and take a cut, instead of attempting to negotiate the matter. The only negotiations should be over how higher cut can they take…..15-25% cut. Now the issue of a simple pay-cuts mushrooms into all kinds of other silly options.
I agree. If the intent was genuine – the execution – at a keystroke – should be swift. The intent was never there it is now obvious. The OBA politicians are still taking salary but depositing into an escrow account? to benefit a charity? how is that helping the consolidated fund? Isn’t that the objective?
And eliminating this year’s contribution will not materially affect future year payouts if the investment managers incorporate this into long term investment strategy. They can make up for this by the way they invest the assets without exposing the fund to significantly more risk….
If you can find me an investment manager who can factor in a double digit return year on year as a certainty, please give me his number!
The pension fund is already underfunded and this proposal by the PLP is just a crafty way to defer a massive cost. It is the future generations that are going to be left holding the bag on this one, unfortunately.
Try calling Alan Stanford or Bernie Madoff. They can probably help.
The 411–”And eliminating this year’s contribution will not materially affect future year payouts if the investment managers incorporate this into long term investment strategy.” Dream on. Do you know anything at all about the underfunded state of the pension fund? About how well the “investment managers” have managed the fund to date? About the current prospect for solid returns on investment in this market? The truth of the matter is that robbing the pension funds of more than $60million this year to make up for government mismanagement of the economy is ultimately going to have a serious negative impact on our young people. Cannonier is right–the premier’s games playing with the pension funds (as in how to make a pay cut not seem like a pay cut)is raiding the future.
my last comment is that Cannonier time and time again shows his naivety and lack of exposure to the crucial financial challenges to which we find ourselves subject. He instils no confidence when he speaks. He hailed the proposal one day and then after talking to his “learned advisors” now rejects the proposal using arguments that are not well articulated, flawed and demonstrate his lack of understanding.
You are fogetting one thing. When he speaks he speaks for himself. He’s then reeled in and handed a script to read from. Gibbons in the backroom pulling the strings.
Sad
So who sent Walter Roban out on a mission? The puppet master Dr Brown?
OBA=UBP,
Just wondering,who writes the scripts for Derrick Burgess et.al?
I’m not an OBA supporter, but it appears that the PLP are the one playing political football with this one. The OBA have stated that they ARE prepared to take the 5% pay cut but Cabinet Ministers (who take home about $170,000) should be prepared to take a 10% cut. Where is the issue there?
Furthermore, the proposed pension freeze does not have the same implications for the MPs as it does for civil servants as they have two totally separate pension plans which operate quite separately.
The Government should NOT be allowed to withhold pension contributions for the purpose of prettying up the budget. We are continuing to run up a tab that our children are going to have to pay off.
Correct they knew the OBA would respond and the OBA played rith into it which alowed the PLP to come out with their release once again trying to paint the OBA in a bad light (ie calling them name cause that’s what this amounts to as evidence above) This is to disstract people from the other story where the PLP pretend to want to take a pay cut that once was explained by an “Accountant” turned out to be a veiled increase.(See other thread for details) I hope the 18 to 25 year old crowd is paying attention as the PLP are playing Russian Rolet with their future…
LOL
If politicians are arguing about this… I have no hope that politicans will unite and work progressively for great change in this country.
Mp’s should be taken a 10-15% cut higher than anything proposed for the civil servants to be cut by period.
Also any MP that was serious about helping Bermuda in general would have suggested going to an income tax, or using a salary tax that is proportional to wages ie.. higher rate taxs for higher paying scales
Rather telling that the PLP statement posted in the Update above now refers to a “17.5% reduction in total remuneration”. However, The Premier originally requested a “17.5% reduction in pay”. It seems the PLP have realised that the 17.5% is not a reduction in pay after all. Same sort of erroneous statement as the “payroll tax has only increased 2%” the other year, when in fact it increased 2 percentage points from 14 to 16, which is an increase of 14.28%. Still the faithful will think it the same and not realise that the 17.5% is merely raiding the cookie jar and robbing the future to pay for the present.
“Why do Mosquitoes buzz in people’s ear”……interesting reading.
Be bold Mr. Cannioner and Mr Richards take a higher percentage of pay-cut and stop dancing around the issue. Stop the “political posturing”. Lets move on, for the good of the country. Yes, at present you still do look weak, and weaker as you continue to dance. “But, forget that and act in the best interest of Bermuda”. As economist Mr. Craig Simmons indicated the pension will not effect the younger people for years to come, it however will impact those older folks that are nearing retirement. But, a look at the figures suggest it will not have a huge impact at all.
Are Craig and the OBA/UBP using the same account that they used when they set up a charity fund some years ago when the members of the legislature were given a raise and they said they would donate their raise to charity?
The OBA/UBP is long on promises but short on follow through.
Another thing, why didn’t Cannonier make that statement in the House rather than wait to speak to reporters outside of the House. I don’t I’ve ever heard him speak in the House, just as he rarely spoke in the Senate. I guess he has to have prepared remarks and we all know that in the House and the Senate you must speak off the cuff.
Wow, now the govt (Bud the Roban) has come out and really landed themselves in it.
They’re now saying “PLP’s MPs and Ministers are ready to take a 17.5% cut in remuneration”. Completely untrue. As has been commented many times since Friday, it’s a 5% reduction in remuneration, not 17.5%. The rest of it is misleading and irrelevent, as there is no impact on the individual’s pension.
The PLP is also saying the “OBA MPs are only willing to take a 5% cut”. Well, I hesitate to use the word ‘lie’, but this is one. The OBA has been suggesting a simple 10% salary cut for about a year, and still suggests it.
Why does the PLP have to cover everything in layers and layers of deception? It’s no wonder no-one trusts them. Even their own supporters don’t actually expect any truth out of them.
Welcome to the Laverne and special4you show! Tune in daily for denials, misconceptions, propaganda and card games (race card that is) sponsored solely by the PLP.
@ Cancer,
While on the subject of denials,have you seen the Defender/8 votes starring in the You Tube hit referring an opposition MP. She denied it’s contents,and it was eventually removed.
Unfortunately for her, copies were made and are now in many households.
It is no show, @Cancer you strongly dislike the fact that persons are coming back at you with solid answers in your attempt to spin propaganda. You and your OBA/UBP fans spin out stuff daily, and yet can not handle it when others are able to provide strong debate and facts that knock your answers flat on the floor. So like you everyone is entitled to support whatever political party they chose, and share their worldviews on issues. You are not always correct in your deliberations, and often tend to present a bias view on issues, if you think it will reflect negatively on the PLP.
SpecialGirl, here’s a simple question.
Would the PLP MP’s agree to the OBA suggestion, which is agreeing a simple 10% pay cut?
Rather than the 5% pay cut they PLP is currently offering?
It’s a simple question. What is the answer?
And now to put the ‘cat amongst the pigeons”.
There have been many comments about ‘robbing the pension fund’.
A trivia question (that is true). Which Financial Secretary and Minister of Finance approved an aproximate $40m withdrawal from the pension fund at the early stages of the inception of the pension funds?
A caller to one of the talk shows asked the question but I do not recall anyone calling with an answer.
Are you referring to when pension money was invested in capital projects? Today it is being redirected to pay salaries, not the same. Now answer this. Was the money repaid, and if it was wrong then, as you are implying, why is it not wrong now? If it’s not wrong now, it wasn’t wrong then – can’t have it both ways. Oh of course, it’s OK now because the UBP did it!
Gosh you are awfully clever!
These comments above are not as much about “robbing the pension fund” as they are about trying to pass off something that is not really being sacrificed (until much later) as a pay cut. Maybe someone tried to make a withdrawal in a previous administration. Who the eff knows. But it’s not relevant and IT IS IN THE PAST.
A Progressive Labour Party spokesman said: “The choice between the PLP and the OBA is clear. PLP MPs and Ministers are ready to take a 17.5 percent reduction in their total compensation. OBA MPs are only willing to take a five percent cut.
“Don’t believe the smoke and mirrors. No matter how much Craig Cannonier, Grant Gibbons and the rest of the OBA try to wiggle out of it, they still believe that members of the PLP should take a bigger cut in salaries than they are willing to take.
Premier Paula Cox had written to the Opposition inviting them to accept a 17.5 percent pay cut, offset by a freeze in pension contributions, which would mean their take-home pay would drop by five percent.
So fools. Once they say 17.5% in total compensation then a pay cut – also what si wrong with PLP cabient minister taking a bigger cut? they made the terrible decisions – Please Leave Parliament!!
So Sick of this back and forth, and Bermuda and it’s people go deeper and deeper in Debt! Really people!!!!???? We can’t pay our bills, We struggle to pay rent and put food on our tables. Cuts SHOULD START AT THE TOP! And should’ve started a long time ago. Last year in fact, when everyone, including Government knew there was no way the economy would pick up. We still have lower to go, I’m not an economist but it doesn’t take one to figure out we are in a bad way. All you need to do is walk around and look around to see it. Alot of us have had pay freezers and pay cuts, yet nothing around us has decreased! almost 7buck for bread is disgusting! Makes me sick that we all sit here and bicker about who said what, and this party and that party! The only way that the Government will take it’s people seriously is if we all come together. Not fight!
They work for US, They represent us, therefore, We SHOULD BE TELLING/DEMANDING WHAT THEY SHOULD DO!!! There should be no questions or negotiation, TAKE A PAY CUT a BIG one and help your country if you trully care for i!
A parent will do anything for their children and in this case the Country is the child of those responsible for it. Our present and future is in your hands. We are suffereing, yet you want to argue semantics. SMDH so sick and tired of this. PLP get off your butts and do what needs to be done, starting with YOU. Get rid of your inflated salaries and take the damn cut.Your country needs it!! Get rid of anything that is not a need, get rid of credit cards, If it’s not an absolute neccessity then STOP and CUT back! And to the OBA grow a pair, because until you do…no one will take you seriusly. IF you want to come back and argue, then DO and put you money where you mouth is. Act like leaders, not a debate team!
When has a PLP/BIU Party politician EVER consulted his/her Constituents before making a decision on political or legal matters? Never.
We need a change. We simply cannot afford the PLP/BIU Party!
Vote For Me and specialgirl4you – nice to have you back – PAID PLP Bloggers – oh and Laverne and Hmmmmmmmmm.so obvious and pathetic. laverne seriously is this part of your contract with the biu? secretary and paid blogger for the PLP/BIU party PLP = Pathetic Lying Pr***s
It’s still far from clear how much of a “pay cut” is on the slate…..
If it’s 5% accompanied with a year’s “holiday” on pension contributions (12.5%), they will take home MORE pay.
How can that be termed a “pay cut”.
Which is it? It’s mechieviously disingenious (deceptive)to talk about “less total compensation”….be clear on what they are actually saying and what the numbers really mean.
It’s a tangled web for sure, but a very simple one……
In my opinion once again the OBA have failed to be honest in their statement and choose to once again mislead the public. It is ridiculous how Mr. Cannonier and his team chose to continue to play politics with this issue and speak complete lies. I say lies because I do not believe that someone who wishes to become the Premier of this island can be so uninformed.
I can say for myself the statement made about the OBA donating 5% of their pay to charity comes as no surprise to me, as it was discussed on their FB page for all to see. The sad part however is that it was not a suggestion made in the best interest of the people but in the best interest of the OBA, as it was suggested to do so to one up the PLP as far as the pay cuts. The OBA Leadership were encouraged by their members and supporters to respond to the Premiers pay cut request with the charity donation so that they would appear to be more caring on the topic then the PLP.(This is how they said it) This is not something I made up this is what was discussed on the OBA FB page when the request was made by the Premier. I SMH at that as I know for a fact that when this decision was made by the PLP Legislators it had nothing to do with trying to one up the OBA and was all about taking the same type of cut they were asking others to take, the fact that the PLP Government decided to take a further cut shows that they really want to show the people that they are in this with them. The OBA seem to be all about making their Party look good and lees about simply doing the right thing, shown by their remarks on this topic so far.
Another sad thing in my opinion is how the OBA leader could say that the PLP Government is asking the workers to take a larger cut then they are willing to take. How does he get that? 17.5% is larger then 8% even when translated into a different language. There is no logical way the OBA leader could have come up with that conclusion. Even if he is saying that the 12.5% pension contribution offsets the 12.5% pay cut it still lacks substance to suggest that Government is asking the workers to take a lager cut as the workers 8% pension contribution freeze offsets their 8% cut and seeing as they are not being asked to take an additional cut it is clear that the Government taking the 5% additional cut which will affect their take home pay is no doubt a larger cut. The OBA Leader is sure to know this, and if not him a member of his team. So why would he make such a foolish statement?
Just as the blogger LOL (original) above is by posting that in the first report on this pay cut issue a blogger “accountant” showed that the cut was an increase, but failed to mention how further down in the conversation the same blogger “accountant” realized were he was mistaking in his calculation and agreed that it was indeed a 17.5% pay cut, the OBA are failing to state the truth on this matter.
Once again OBA MP’s please be real and truly say if you are in or out with the pay cut, because you know when voted on in the house you will lose the vote if you chose to vote against it. You know you won’t do that because it would not look good on your part if you do, no matter how much spin you put on it. Another misleading comment from the OBA leader is that ministers make all the decisions so should take a bigger cut, so I guess the PLP and OBA MP’s don’t vote on Legislation? Also the fact that the more one makes the more will be taken from their pay(5% of 150,000 is more cash then 5% of 55,000), means nothing? Please Mr. Cannonier if your going to attempt to fool people into believing your nonsense at least try to come up with something convincing.
Agreed. Just more bickering for the sake of it. Kim you have my vote, you have always work hard for St. George.
My apologies I did not see the entire thread thing to do you know. I can admit when I’m wrong unlike some others (on the pay cut topic) However I stand by what I have said about the PLP in the past as it was my experance. I all so note Bernews has deleted or not posted some of my posts.
LOL
@ Makai,
Is the 17.5% a Pay Cut, as described by the Premier, or a Reduction in Total Package, as described by the PLP?
Do tell us how you arrived at this imaginary 17.5% salary reduction for the PLP/BIU Party. How can NOT paying for something (pension contributions) that one used to pay for be included in a pay cut?
I still don’t understand the math.
Something else you conveniently forgot to mention, Makai, is the Premier was the one who initially didn’t want any sort of paycut to begin with. And the OBA talked about MP pay cuts over a year ago.
… the same way that not spending money you don’t have amounts to saving money …
@Star Man because the 12.5% will still be deducted from their pay. I contribute to my pension and if my job told me they will no longer pay into my pension and will not use the money they deduct from my pay to put towards it but will still deduct it from my pay that would mean that they are cutting my pay. Its my money and its deducted to pay into a benefit so I’m cool with that but when it is deducted and not put into a benefit then that means my pay has been cut as I am not seeing my full pay that I agreed to work for. It is a sacrifice on the part of all who agree to it. Just because it was being paid into their pension does not take away from the fact that its their money, money that will now be deducted at no personal benefit to them. This is the simple reality of the matter and opinions on if its enough of a cut or if they should have been paid the amount they were or not is just extra issues that people choose to add. The Facts are clear.
Sorry Makai but you are misguided and misinformed. Unless you are a Government employee, or an MP, where you work is probably a Defined Contribution Plan, if so you are correct. This is not the case with MPs or Government employees. Their’s is a Defined Benefit Plan – huge difference. I strongly suggest you check out the difference, you will then understand.
Shaking the head the fact still remains that the money that was taken out for their contribution will still be taken out of their pay but not for their pension contribution. Its still their money that is being cut. Fact. Defined Contribution Plan/ Defined Benefit plan ether way money was taken out of their pay as their contribution that money will still be taken out. fact
Sorry your facts are wrong. Well let’s try this one. In a year’s time it is decided that the contributions will be reinstated, but to make up for the year missed, the contributions will be raised from 12.5% to 20%. If not paying the 12.5% is a pay cut, using your logic, you would call this a pay raise.
Oh Dear – i think that is called having your a$$ handed to you on a plate.
Not sure where you get your facts Shaking the Head but The Government implemented a sound investment strategy which has allowed the fund’s assets to grow to $450 million as at Dec. 2011. Just under 10 times more than the annual projected pension payout. So I think its safe to assume that when the pension contributions are reinstated in a years time it will be feasible to continue with the same rate. (No increase needed). Still my points remain on the pay cut as even your views on the details of the pension are not dispelling the facts of the pay cut.
I trust that the powers that be know what their doing with the pension as it was them who saved it, it was at a very bad state when they took it over.
Gosh I thought I was the only one noticing how those four mentioned above are so blind when it comes to the FlipPLoP. I have no problem with someone supporting a party they believe in for whatever reasons but at least learn to say – ok we got it wrong – we could have done it better – things happened in the past administration that were not proud of etc etc . Those kinda words would never come out of those blind loyalist mouths because they prefer to defend defend defend to the very end. PLP has never done anything wrong in their eyes! Until those persons can admit once and awhile that the PLP sometimes (well more often then not – most times) gets it wrong, they will not earn the respect of the people – and until then they will remain known as the FlipPLOP party..
Makai Dickerson –
“Another sad thing in my opinion is how the OBA leader could say that the PLP Government is asking the workers to take a larger cut then they are willing to take. How does he get that?”
Howso? Well for starters, because under the government’s proposal workers will essentially work 26 years for 25 years worth of pension whereas MPs will get the same pension contribution had there been no “pension holiday”. Does that seem equitable to you?
The ‘pension holiday’ just further underfunds an already underfunded pension plan. As per economist Bob Stewert in 2011 the House of Assembly Pension Plan was “46.8% funded, representing a deficit of $8 million” while the civil service pension plan was already “34.2% funded, representing a deficit of about $760 million”.
This ‘pension holiday’ will add another $65m(?) to that deficit while freeing up those funds to be spent elsewhere. It’s the equivalent of me not paying into my retirement fund so that I can pay my credit card bill (all the while refusing to cut back on my cable, cellphone, etc.) That puts the responsibility on my children to eventually support me in my retirement. But they’ll be too busy STILL paying off the interest on the debt I’ve run up.
STOP it, and just accept a pay-cut all MPs from all political parties, stop dancing around the issue OBA/UBP. So far the PLP is willing to accept a 17 1/2% of pay-cut. Negotiate only the percentage of decrease between 10 to 25 % is a wide range to select from. What is the problem? PAY-CUTS NOW !!!
Let’s stop and rethink here. When such a cut was first suggested by the OBA, the Premier refused and said it takes testicular fortitude not to give in to a symbolic gesture. A few weeks ago she met with the BIU who suggested they would consider a cut, if MPs also took a cut. The Premier said she’d think about it but couldn’t speak for other MPs. (Fabulous leadership style). Last week, Zane Desilva was reported to have said he’d have to ask his wife, and Walter Roban hadn’t discussed it. Suddenly at the end of last week this 17.5% figure is announced. As it was including a stop in contribution to the Pension Fund (is this legal?) and someone retiring (when does it take effect?) will have to work an extra year, has the complusory retirement age been amended (is it legal)?
Now, who’s playing games?
Get back to the main and most importatnt matter to sort out, which is that Government has run out of money to pay interest on the debt and existing payroll, can’t borrow without prohibitive interest rates and raising the debt ceiling, and is in panic mode. Sine an elected UBP Minister of Tourism seems to be the only person doing something positive, it seems clear that there needs to be a wholesale change in Government.
It is always important to review and revise our opinions regarding decisions. One must always consider a different thought to an issue, or remain standing still. There is nothing wrong with reviewing or changing one’s opinion on an issue. However, it does become a problem, when one is not able to make a final decision that stands of firm ground, and bring forward silly ideas like (no credit cards, donate money to charity..etc,…) this kinda of response makes the OBA/UBP look extremely weak, as others move on to the next phase of the issue. Why get bugged down only on phase 1, while everyone else has moved on phase 2….. Most governments are struggling today worldwide with financial cost, but do we not work as one, in the best interest of Bermuda? Or do we continue to play these silly political games of “I got you”? Let grow up politically and move on. Is this about Bermuda and whats in the best interest of it’s people or is it about the OBA/UBP and their political gain?
It is about survival, and the PLP have put that at risk by their out of control spending on frivolities and overspends, that have benefitted a few elite. Obviously you aren’t one of the favored.
Incidentally, and I’m not connected to the OBA, I would be surprised if they want to be the next Government because of the cuts in Government employees that will be needed. Who wants to be remembered as the Party who fired 2,000 Bermudians?
PLP is always changing, reviewing, revising, considering a different thought after the damage is done because they have no foresight. After they see the damage for themselves they do what they always do and that is flipPLoP. Its the flipflop PLP party!
The governement will do okay, like all governments they will do what must be done. OBA/UBP will also do the same thing, they will also make cut-backs, and borrow monies. So lets be real!! The only thing is that they will be more cruel towards the average man.