could lead to spouses being sold short, Shadow Finance Minister Grant Gibbons warned yesterday.

Dr. Gibbons said it "effectively allowed someone to cut out their spouse if they so desired'', and stated the amendment "cuts against the family contract''.

He said the amendment could affect the non-working spouse who has supported the working spouse during years of marriage -- and added that if the non-working spouse was not taken care of, it could create a burden on the social fabric of the whole community.

Finance Minister Eugene Cox said there were "gives and takes'' in the whole scheme, which he said was "reasonably flexible'' and "not cast in stone''.

The clash came as The House went into the second reading of the National Pensions Scheme (Occupational Pensions) Amendment Act 1999.

And both Government Whip Ottiwell Simmons and Mr. Cox warned employees to exercise caution when investing their pensions in higher-yield schemes -- because higher-yield also means higher risk.

Mr. Cox said when people work 35 to 40 years in one scheme, he hoped that they would get 50 to 70 percent of their contributions back -- but nothing less than ten percent.

However, the biggest objection to the scheme came from Dr. Gibbons over Clause 7 of the Amendment.

Dr. Gibbons complained about receiving the additional set of amendments on Clause 7 only that morning, stating that it was a "travesty'' for such an important amendment to come "at this late date''.

The amendment allows the employee to select the beneficiary for their pension.

But Mr. Simmons stated: "This section does not disenfranchise any spouse.

What we're doing here is giving the family unit equal opportunity.'' He said the family could decide what was best, and instead of making the spouse the sole beneficiary, it would allow for the pension to be spread out across the whole family if desired.

But Dr. Gibbons objected, stating that the amendment contained no provision which would require any sort of "discussion or joint decision''.

And Paget West MP Patricia Gordon Pamplin said the amendment could create problems if someone decided to leave their pension to their mistress or step-daughter, for example.

Dr. Gibbons added that the "layering effect'' should be considered, noting that he would prefer the pension go to children or blood relatives rather than a golf buddy.

Moving out of committee, Dr. Gibbons criticised Government for an overall lack of details regarding the pension amendment, stating that there were "at least a dozen areas where we're lacking regulation''.

Dr. Gibbons wanted more details about what kinds of schemes could pension plans be invested in.

He also said there were no regulations to address the pension plans of self-employed persons in any "amplified kind of way''.

He said more rules were needed about moving pensions from one employer to the next, and said non-Bermudians were in a "catch-22'' under the Act.

"The train is about to leave the station, and we're not quite sure where it's heading,'' Dr. Gibbons said.

But Mr. Cox assured that the regulations had up to 12 months before being finalised.

It is not mandatory for expatriate workers to join the pension plans. And Mr.

Cox said Government will be examining this at a later date.

Going back into committee, Dr. Gibbons questioned a section which stated that asset funds of more than $1 million would have to be audited.

He wanted to know how much it would cost on an annual basis, and questioned if it would eat into the funds too much.

Dr. Gibbons asked if there were any consequences or liability for those, including auditors, who did not report on the funds. He noted that there was a "sensitivity'' about auditors being sued.

Mr. Cox responded that anyone who did not comply with the Act would be committing an offence -- and added that the Institute for Chartered Accountants had seen the Act and agreed with it.

Earlier, Dr. Gibbons criticised Government for failing to consult widely enough.

And he claimed that he had spoken to some members of the business community who had not seen the draft of the amendment Act.

Dr. Gibbons added that there were around 10,000 expatriate workers on the Island -- who would face problems transporting their pensions when they leave Bermuda.

Shadow Development and Opportunity Minister Allan Marshall added that the Opposition recognised the importance of pension provision.

And Mr. Simmons said a lot of cash was generated by pensions schemes -- and he urged both small and large businesses to make sure they had "good administrators.

He added that the Act was "very liberal and flexible'' -- but insisted that all employers had "an obligation to provide for the future of the working class''.

Development and Opportunity Minister Terry Lister -- an accountant -- said many elderly clients had come to him to sell off their businesses and had no pensions.

But he said the firms had often been allowed to run down -- leaving the owners with little return and financial problems.

Mr. Lister said: "Pensions will stop that -- the biggest beneficiary of this Act is the small business owner above everybody else.'' The clause to allow the employee to select any beneficiary passed along with the Act.

Eugene Cox: The Finance Minister said there were "gives and takes'' in the whole scheme, which he said was "reasonably flexible'' and "not cast in stone''.

Grant Gibbons: He said the pension schemes "effectively allowed someone to cut out their spouse if they so desired'', and stated the amendment "cuts against the family contract''.