May 14, 2015

Press Statement

The People’s Campaign would like to highlight the following inconsistencies and statements that have been made surrounding the airport development project and request that the Minister of Finance publicly respond to the questions raised in the hope that he will bring clarification to the people of Bermuda. MINISTER RICHARDS HAS STATED THAT CCC BROUGHT AECON TO THE PROJECT BUT THE EVIDENCE CLEARLY ESTABLISHES THAT IT IS AECON WHO BROUGHT THE PROJECT TO THEM In an email from Susannah Denovan Fortler (CCC) to Luc Allary (CCC), Don Olsen (CCC) et al. on Friday, November 14th 2014 the following question was raised: “Can you confirm that Aecon brought us (CCC) this project? We just want to avoid the language that might give the impression we are out shopping for a Canadian supplier to do the work…” (doc.1665) To which Don Olsen (CCC) responds: “Yes Aecon brought this project to CCC that was last winter and we first saw the Minister of Finance from Bermuda at the office of Aecon.” (doc. 1665) This is further supported in an exchange between Don Olsen (CCC) and Wendy Dempsey (CCC) in which it is stated: “That is the project that I talked to you about 2 weeks ago when I went to Toronto to see the Minister of Finance from Bermuda he visited the Aecon and I was invited.” (doc. 0037) In his defense, MP Richards stated in an interview with Bernews on May 13th, 2015: “I became aware of this model of financing and development towards the end of April from our financial adviser, and I thought that it could be useful to Bermuda because it will enable us to build a new airport, create a few hundred jobs.” The Minister of Finance has admitted that the Government’s financial advisor is CIBC. Steve Nackan (Aecon) to Wendy Dempsey (CCC) stated: “We have a back channel of sorts with CIBC who is their advisor ….” (0183) Is the Minister of Finance not concerned that Aecon is driving a process that would ultimately result in this same said company receiving not only hundreds of millions of dollars of Government revenues but also operational control of the LF Wade International Airport for 35 years?

IN AN INTERVIEW WITH ZBM NEWS ON MAY 13TH, 2015, MINISTER RICHARDS SAID THAT HE FIRST LEARNED THAT AECON WOULD BE THE DEVELOPER AT THE MEETING OF JUNE 4TH 2014 WHEN HE ALLEGES THAT THEY FIRST MET. Is the Minister of Finance not concerned that Aecon was selected as the developer prior to CCC assessing the viability of the airport project? WHAT PROCESS DID MINISTER RICHARDS TAKE TO ENSURE THAT PROPER DUE DILIGENCE WAS CARRIED OUT? THE EVIDENCE SUPPORTS THAT NO DUE DILIGENCE WAS DONE AND A PAPER TRAIL WAS INITIATED BY AECON TO LEGITIMIZE THE AWARDING OF THE CONCESSIONS CONTRACT TO AECON? On October 15th, 2014, Steve Nackan (Aecon) in a communication to Wendy Dempsey (CCC) states: “I am working on a “Capabilities” document that can serve as part of a paper trail on your selection of Aecon. A draft is attached.” (0985) On October 17th, 2014, in an email from Wendy Dempsey (CCC) to Steve Nackan (Aecon) stated: “I attach a sample questionnaire for guidance on completion of a due diligence package that could be sent to Bermuda. I am not suggesting that each question needs to be responded to but merely that the ones that can help support the choice of Aecon such as the corporate entities and financial statements and safety policies and ethical practices policy etc. would be helpful.” (0993) Is the Minister of Finance not concerned that due diligence questionnaires were not completed PRIOR to the confirmation that Aecon was selected as the developer? AECON INTENTIONALLY CAME TO BERMUDA IN AN ATTEMPT TO BE PERCEIVED AS CCC

In an interview on May 13th, 2015, Minister Richards attempts to justify the use of the

word “cover”: “You don’t want to confuse the word “cover”, to think that it’s a front in a

typical use of that word, because CCC are more than just providing cover; they’re more like

providing cover in the insurance sense, because they are providing a guarantee to the

Bermuda Government against overruns and against delays.”

However, in an email dated July 3rd, 2014 from Steve Nackan (Aecon) to Wendy

Dempsey (CCC), and Don Olsen (CCC), Nackan states: “A bunch of us are going down to

Bermuda Sunday-Tuesday to do some due diligence….I don’t think we need CCC

presence for the visit. I do however feel it is important to maintain the CCC cover for

this visit i.e. we are the CCC Team etc etc. So I would like to use the CCC logo or some

variation of it when we send e.g. proposed agenda for the visit….” (docs 0095; 0037; 0105;

0108)

This was something that even CCC was uncomfortable with. The documents also show, that Steve Nackan (CCC) was worried about being further exposed and the possibility of the team being shut down he states: “based on what I’ve

been told, have to consider shutting down the team for now to avoid further exposure…” (0361) We are spending a ton of $$daily on this. Going back to Bermuda with a message that we need to change an approach we tabled is going to be highly embarrassing, will erode trust and is risky.” (0361) We need to try to work with what we have and massage it to meet your concerns…to work with whatever it is to keep things going on track.” (0361) On February 27th, 2015 in House of Assembly, Minister Richards stated: “The point is

this, that the Bermuda Government didn’t choose Aecon — CCC chose Aecon — not the

Bermuda Government...” This statement is contradicted by the documents that have

been presented.

Does the Minister of Finance have any indication of who the beneficiaries are of

the “ton of $$” that Steve Nackan stated was purportedly being spent on this

project?

Was the Finance Minister clearly aware that he was meeting with Aecon in August

2014, and why was it necessary for Aecon to come to Bermuda for a meeting

pretending to be CCC?

THE MINISTER OF FINANCE MADE STATEMENTS TO THE PUBLIC THAT WERE

CONTRARY TO WHAT THE EVIDENCE SUPPORTS.

The documents show that both CCC and Aecon expressed concerns that the Minister of

Finance was misleading the public.

At the November 10th, 2014 press conference announcing the signing of the MOU, the

Minister of Finance accompanied by Minister of Tourism and Transportation along with

Luc Allary (CCC) and others. Minister Bob Richards stated that the model to be used,

“demands total transparency adhering to international best practices.”

On November 28th, 2014, the Minister of Finance, in response to questions posed in the

House of Assembly by the Opposition Minister of Finance David Burt, stated that CCC

will conduct its own due diligence and select a developer: “The CCC alternative, while

protecting the principles of transparency and value for money, will also allow the sourcing

of competitively selected vendors through the internationally acclaimed and trusted

resources of the CCC.”

This is the opposite of the view expressed by Wendy Dempsey (CCC) on November 13th

three days after the press conference where she states, “This should be a lesson to stop

using the word “transparency” as CCC is not transparent in its contracting.” (1648)

Is the Minister of Finance still holding to his public statements that CCC conducts

business in a ‘Transparent’ manner?

AECON AND CCC PLAYED AN ACTIVE PART IN DRAFTING AND APPROVING THE

MINISTER’S PRESS RELEASES ON NOVEMBER 10TH, 2014

In response to a draft press statement sent to CCC by David Fox (Bda Govt) on

November 7th, 2014, Wendy Dempsey (CCC) emails Steve Nackan (Aecon) and

expresses, “I have just received this and have some concerns with the press release and the

misleading statements regarding CCC.” (1386)

The sentiments expressed by Wendy Dempsey (CCC) were supported by Steve Nackan

(Aecon) who states that, “Definitely. It is just not true.” (1453). He further goes on to say

that someone “got hold of the Minister tonight and advised him of the concerns…” (1453)

Does this process to have potential business partners edit, vet and approve

ministerial press statements adhere to international best practices?

MINISTER RICHARDS INTENTIONALLY FUZZIED THE FACTS TO PURPOSEFULLY

MISLEAD THE PUBLIC

In an email sent on November 8th, 2014 in reference to his ministerial statement, MP

Richards stated: “I’ve fuzzied the no new debt part in view of the funding gap.” (1464)

According to Nobel prize winner (economics), Paul Krugman, fuzzy math is a catch

phrase used often by politicians to describe numbers, particularly in regard to

government spending, that they claim do not add up correctly. It is frequently used by

politicians who are dismissing another politician's numbers as doubtful or otherwise

inaccurate.

In addition, the NY Times reported in June 12, 2011 - ‘Fuzzy Accounting Enriches

Groupon’ - “The world would be richer if Groupon’s notion of accounting caught on’… ‘If

investors accepted this fantastical form of accounting, all sorts of companies would be worth

billions more, too.”

Also, according to QFinance Newsletter the definition of Fuzzy Accounting is “Accounting

practices that mislead investors”

Is it acceptable for the Minister of Finance to have “fuzzied” information presented to

the public?

In addition, does the Minister of Finance accept that the word ‘fuzzy’ is an

inappropriate word to use and that statement will tarnish both his and Bermuda’s

reputation?

The People’s Campaign will be holding a town hall meeting for the public tonight at St Paul Centennial at 5:30pm. In addition, we invite all members of the public to join us at

the grounds of the House of Assembly at 9am as the People’s Campaign plans to be on the grounds for the entire sitting of the House of Assembly. For those who are unable to attend at 9am, we encourage the public to join us during their lunch hour and after work. We are calling all members of the public to wear the colour red as a show of solidarity. In solidarity,

People’s Campaign Representatives