Mr Grant, a Bermudian carpenter by trade with 30 years of experience, claimed he was discriminated against in a complaint first filed with the Human Rights Commission in June 2008. Nearly four years later the board, headed up by Paul Harshaw, made their ruling known at a brief hearing held at the Department of Human Affairs.

The complaint lists three respondents, Apex Limited, Andrea Battiston, the company’s operations manager who essentially was Mr Grant’s boss and Kevin Mason, the site superintendent, or second-in-command. He never appeared before the board for the inquiry at any stage. The evidence was taken over three days in October last year.

The crux of Mr Grant’s case was that he was offered employment on terms less favourable than the terms offered to others employed by Apex. The others consisted of groups of Polish and Canadian contract workers. WE TALK A LOT OF CRAP WHEN SOMETHING HAPPEN TO A BLACK PERSON IN THI

I remember when, 4 or 5 years ago, anyone that said Bermuda had better prepare for a downturn in the economy was “making mischief” and a “hater”.

If you are being COMPLETELY HONEST, you will remember that the SDO had to be rushed through to ensure that Rosewood or other hotel groups would have pumped funds into the project and so that there was potential for future jobs and employment for BERMUDIANS.

If the Government neglected the “process” to satisfy the oppositions demands for the SDO to be passed for the greater good, is this really worthy of these posts?

Many of these comments, sound like FOX NEWS/TEA PARTY/REPUBLICANS.

and until you have “read the report in its entirety”, you’re not really in the position to give an opinion, now are you?
So please do us all a favour and p!ss off! Please.

What will it take for their blind supporters to open their eyes & see how they, along with the rest of Bermuda are being screwed over by the PLP?

Thow shalt not criticize the PLP.

Here, if a Minister commits a relatively small infraction, like self-dealing, or wrongful diversion of taxpayer funds, the BIU goes in to the Premier and reminds her to keep her mouth shut and leave the Minister alone, or she will live to regret it.

Do you have any idea how dumb you sound?

But not by your standards, evidently.

I guess that, for the PLP, this type of thing is something you just laugh at, as indicated by your attempt at ‘cool text message speak’ above. The Ombudsman issues an 88-page report that is extremely critical of something the PLP does, and you think it’s a laughing matter.

For the rest of us, the ones who like to see things done legally, ethically, morally, above-board, fairly, honestly, and competently, this is all yet another example of what this government is really about.

In case you forgot your basic science as is the case with most of our government. Stop watching tv and read!

Please remember the SDO that passed called for multiple impact assessments BEFORE planning permission was given.

1) SDO in National Interest Needed for Tucker’s Point
2) Government passes an amendment to ensure SDO is debated
3) SDO goes to parliament
4) After it passes the House, Senate amends SDO
5) SDO Passes

1 year later the Ombudsman (Created by the PLP) points out that according to her, Civil Servants should have had an Environmental Impact Assesment done. This from some 2001 UK Convention.

This is what you call scandal. LMAO

What we see above is, A PRODUCT OF THE PLP, who established the office of the Ombudsman. So us in the PLP are all about honest government.

The headline is very sensational to say the least, “Unlawful” is not doing an EIA before sending an SDO to parliament is quite a stretch.

What is interesting however is in her very long report the word “Unlawful” appears ZERO times.