Amendments to legislation controlling municipal elections were approved by the House of Assembly last night, despite coming under fire from the Opposition.

The Municipalities Amendment Act 2015 lays the groundwork for the hybrid voting system, in which residents and ratepayers are able to vote.

Sylvan Richards, the Junior Minister for Home Affairs, said that of the eight councillors, two would be elected by residents of the municipality, while another two would be elected by rate-paying businesses. The remaining four positions would be determined proportionally, based on the number of ratepayers and residents voting in a municipality.

The Act also moved the responsibility of operating municipal elections from the corporation secretaries to the Parliamentary Registrar, starting with the May 2015 municipal election.

While Mr Richards argued that the amendments would improve democracy, the Progressive Labour Party took aim at the One Bermuda Alliance’s move to allow business owners the right to vote, promising the decision would be reversed as soon as the Opposition regained power.

During the debate, Shadow Minister for Human Affairs Rolfe Commissiong said returning voting power to business owners was a step away from democratic values.

Referring to the passing of municipal legislation in 2013, Mr Commissiong said: “We expressed it then and we express now an opposition to the diminishing of the franchise that was democratically extended to the residents of not just Hamilton, but also St George’s.”

David Burt, Shadow Minister for Finance, questioned what would stop Government from extending the ability for businesses to vote to general elections, and said the OBA was acting because it wanted to further empower its own voter base.

“They don’t like the results of democracy, so they are changing the rules,” Mr Burt said. “This party stands for democracy. This party stands for one man, one vote.”

While Attorney-General Trevor Moniz argued that former Premier Dr Ewart Brown had attempted to abolish the Corporation of Hamilton, PLP MP Zane DeSilva said the party had never tabled such legislation.

“We were putting the city in the hands of the people it belonged to,” Mr DeSilva said. “All the marching in the streets, the banners, it was the takeover that never was.”

He called the decision to give business owners the ability to vote a “vicious slap in the face” to residents of the municipalities.

Finance Minister Bob Richards, meanwhile, said that the City of Hamilton was different to the rest of the Bermuda because the bulk of taxpayers there were businesses.

“The City of Hamilton is the economic centre of gravity of this country,” he said. “Most of Hamilton is business. Most of it is not residential. When the business day ends in Hamilton, the town empties.”

He said the new legislation would address an imbalance of representation, which had “crippled and lamed” the municipality in Hamilton.

“Our experience with the current structure is a result of an imbalance with who runs the city,” he said. “There’s an imbalance of interest.

“We are a country where we are trying to get ourselves back on our feet. There’s been a lot of talk about the revitalisation of Hamilton and the Waterfront. Because of the imbalance in the Corporation of Hamilton today, that is totally off the table because they are embroiled in litigation.”

Glenn Blakeney, however, denied the suggestion, saying that the corporation had been moving forward with efforts that would bring direct foreign investment in the capital, noting the Par-la-Ville hotel project.

Minister for Community, Culture and Sport Patricia Gordon-Pamplin spoke to suggestions by Opposition leader Marc Bean that the practice could extend to other areas in Bermuda such as Warwick or the BLDC: She said: “It’s ludicrous to say Warwick could have special votes or the BLDC. These are spurious arguments that do not make sense.

“If we can’t find a way to trigger growth we are doomed — I am the eternal optimist but we can only reach nirvana if we all work together and put all our resources together.

“Absence is pretty scary — we have seen exodus of businesses — what better way to get them to return than to let them know there is some point of representation in how the city is run.”

The PLP criticised the OBA over what it described as a “loophole” in an amendment passed in the House that allows an owner of multiple businesses to be eligible to have a municipality vote for each business owned.

While the legislation stipulates that an individual may only cast one vote, they said a provision for that individual to nominate another person to cast a vote on their behalf allows for multiple votes.

The privilege does not extend to a business that is spread over multiple properties or to subsidiaries of a single business.

Mr Bean requested clarity on the issue multiple times and Government had to mull over its own legislation for quite some time before clarifying the law. He criticised the OBA for not fully understanding the legislation it was trying to pass and called on them to rise and report progress. However, a vote was taken, the Ayes won and the amendment was passed.

The Opposition leader said the fact that a City homeowner who did not live in the city could not vote yet a business owner could on multiple occasions amounted to discrimination and the amendment represented a nail in the coffin of the OBA government.

“I offer a not-so-subtle warning that the Corporation of Hamilton is one of those hazards that will sink the OBA,” he said. “Unfortunately it is one of many hazards that have been self-created, self-induced and self-inflicted by this current government.

“This debacle — sooner rather than later — will be another nail in the coffin of the OBA.”