to go ahead after MPs on Friday approved a private bill.

At the start of the debate, Leonard Gibbons (UBP) introduced an amendment to the bill which meant that the owners of the property would only have to seek approval to change the hotel's golf course if it wishes to use it for any other purpose.

Until now, the hotel has had to seek approval from the House of any changes to the golf course at all. Hotel owners Bermuda Properties Ltd. have said removal of the condition was crucial to the hotel getting new investment, without which it would be forced to close.

Lois Browne-Evans commented that there was "utter confusion'' surrounding the Castle Harbour plan, with members from both sides having varied opinions on the matter.

She said the land was taken from Bermudians in the 1920s and there were no future guarantees that it wouldn't move further away from them in the years to come.

"You can understand how MPs are so divided on what is in the best interests, what should be done today,'' she said. "We accept the amendment, seeking to do something that the Leader of the Opposition said. '' Mrs. Browne-Evans said the new clause, which states "No person shall use the land described. ..for any purpose other than a golf course without the prior approval of both Houses of Legislature'', was for the good of the country.

Both Save Open Spaces and the National Trust had lobbied hard on the plan, she said.

"That is what people were worried about, that is the opposite of what the original bill was saying.'' "Members have the right to vote as they wish, to vote with their conscience.

And we would be foolish not to listen to people who feel passionately about something that should be heard.'' John Barritt (UBP) said the bill was a private one, and as such the Government was not responsible for it.

"Last week, any person would have appreciated the depth of emotion that surrounds that tract of land,'' he said of the debate which began last Friday.

Hamilton East MP Derrick Burgess (PLP) said his relatives were pushed out of Tucker's Town for the development of the Castle Harbour and the Mid-Ocean Clubs in the first half of the century.

"The proposal for Castle Harbour seems to be like a US golf course with houses around it. That property is one of the most beautiful in Bermuda. We should preserve it.'' He said the amendment was unnecessary, since under current law the owners had to come to Parliament anyway for any changes.

And he added that if the Castle Harbour hotel closed, then Bermudians would be found work on other properties and guest workers would also be assisted.

Reginald Burrows (PLP) said that he found the new amendment acceptable.

"Last week it was a bitter pill to swallow but I think I can live with it now,'' he said. "I only hope that what we do today will not be detrimental to future generations.'' Although Shadow Housing Minister Stanley Morton failed to mention which way he was going to vote, he declared that Government members were guilty of "unjust enrichment''.

"That property was taken from its owners and I have heard members stand here and deny any participation in things that have gone on in the past.

"But what you do today will come back and haunt you. If you don't want to be a part of this unjust enrichment, you should condemn it.'' Southampton East MP Stanley Lowe , who sat on the joint select committee, said: "The committee agreed with it on principle but, because of the significant nature of this private members bill, we were anxious to find a solution and to get this bill before the House.

"But even members of the committee had reservations about the amendment of Section 7.

"We considered and examined very carefully and we knew that the complete House should have the benefit of coming to a decision on this bill. I realise that there are still members of this House who have severe reservations regarding the development of that property but we take some comfort in that at least any new development would have to go before the Development Applications Board.'' Shadow Tourism Minister David Allen backed the bill, but only after "agonising over this particular development''.

And he claimed that the main reason for him giving it his support was because it was important that Castle Harbour staff kept their jobs.

"It's a very dark chapter in Bermuda's history,'' he said. "I think it's right and proper that we should give it careful scrutiny and deliberation and put it under the microscope.

"But we have to look at the big picture and what's going to be good for Bermuda in the long term.

"The PLP has said on record that we won't take virgin land and build hotels on it -- we have always been in favour of re-developing existing hotels.

"I want to see the hotel saved and I don't want to see several hundred workers lose out.'' Warwick West MP and Government whip Quinton Edness agreed.

"I have heard a lot about the history of this land and I can feel the pain and hurt of what happened to those people who were moved off the land in the 1920s,'' he said.

MPs approve bill to save jobs at hotel "But a lot has happened in Bermuda since that time. We have to move forward as a country and while I will remember I have been taught how to forgive -- that's what I call making progress.'' Mr. Edness said he believed that, if the development was not economically viable it would close down, with the loss of 400 jobs.

He added that, were the hotel to close, Bermuda would get a bad reputation and businesses would not be prepared to invest in the Island.

"This country would not be looked upon favourably,'' he said.

Opposition MP Walter Lister also said he supported the bill because of the question of jobs.

"I think that we on this side of the House support the fact that the development of that property will create more jobs,'' he said. "We have a responsibility to protect the jobs of Bermudian people.'' Michael Dunkley (UBP) also gave the bill his backing, describing it as "an acceptable compromise''.

But Works and Engineering Minister C.V. (Jim) Woolridge said he was concerned the bill would mean yet more of the Island's precious open spaces carved up.

"As much as Bermudians travel they must be concerned that Bermuda is becoming a mass of concrete,'' he said.

He dismissed earlier arguments that, if the amendment was not approved, Bermuda Properties Ltd. would be forced to close the hotel.

"We have heard members from both sides talk of their concerns about jobs,'' he said. "They say that if we don't give these folks what they want they will go -- well I don't think they will go. I am not going to stand here and try and appease a group of speculators.'' Mr. Woolridge was supported by Government backbencher Trevor Moniz and the PLP's Ottiwell Simmons .

Mr. Moniz argued that the investors had no long term interest in the facility.

"What I can't figure out is how it's going to become economically viable through the building of condiminiums,'' he said. "I can't see how that's going to revive the hotel -- it's just going to be carved up into saleable pieces.

"(Investors) Donaldson Lufkin Jenrette have no interest in the hotel. They want to come in and out in five years. They want to develop it and then sell it as quickly as possible and they want to get a profit out of the sale.

"That's why I'm glad that the protection is there -- so that they have to come back to Parliament in order to get permission for what they want to do.

"I would like to see this hotel survive and prosper but I can't see how that's going to be done -- that's why I can't support this amendment.'' Ottiwell Simmons said: "I have heard promises and I have also seen threats. I have heard that, if Section 7 was not taken out of the private bill than Castle Harbour is likely to close down and those financiers may withdraw their financial support.

"I have also heard promises that there will be jobs for local people and the construction will help the construction industry.

"I have also heard that the property was stolen from the black people in Tucker's Town and I am convinced that the property was not gained in the most legitimate way -- an unforgivable sin has been committed.

"I could stand here all night and relate to you story after story of promises made and never kept.

"I am convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that if this House turned this amendment down the Castle Harbour would not close and people will not lose their jobs.

"I think if they stole the property or didn't get it on the level, I am not going to stand here as a representative of the people and give it to them.

"I will be fighting against this and I know my conscience will be clear.

"This is about greed. This is one of the richest countries in the world but we have given away too much.'' Referring to the fact that party differences had been set aside and MPs on both sides of the House were finding unlikely allies from the opposing benches, Pembroke West MP Ann Cartwright-DeCouto said: "I think we've made a new club here.'' "This property is unique in Bermuda, not only for its beauty and for the fact that it's historical significant but it was a trail blazer in setting up our toursim industry.'' But Tourism Minister David Dodwell nailed his colours to the mast by saying that the bill should be approved.

"I think the private bills committee got it right,'' he said.

"I know we have spent a lot of time on the emotional side of this subject but that happened nearly 80 years ago.'' He said Bermuda had to recognise that tourism could not survive without foreign investment.

"We are going to have to roll out the red carpet for these people, because if they do not come here, they will go elsewhere.'' The amendment also received support from Premier Pamela Gordon and Opposition Leader Jennifer Smith -- who proposed it originally -- who both said the decision was in the best interests of the Country.

The bill then passed by a vote of 26 to ten.

The House later passed the bill on its third reading and it will be tabled in the Senate this week.

Friday's roll call vote will be published in full in tomorrow's paper.