a letter of commitment with the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) came from both the Opposition United Bermuda Party and the private sector yesterday.

Shadow Finance Minister, Grant Gibbons, and Executive Director of the Bermuda International Business Association (BIBA), Pat Philip Bassett, both voiced full support for Mr. Cox's action in response to comments from a senior member of a US think tank who held that the Bermuda Government had made a "strategic mistake'' in signing the letter.

Daniel Mitchell, a senior fellow at the Washington-based Heritage Foundation, in an interview featured in yesterday's Royal Gazette held that Bermuda should have joined forces with other countries threatened by the OECD and fought off their demands rather than "surrendering early in the hopes of getting treated better''.

But both Dr. Gibbons and Mrs. Philip Bassett said that Mr. Cox had not compromised Bermuda's position and autonomy by signing the letter.

Mrs. Philip Bassett, while acknowledging that Mr. Mitchell "is entitled to his opinion'', said: "We are very supportive of the way Government and the private sector have handled it.

"We had quite good cooperation between Government and the private sector and with our global entities,'' she continued.

"Bermuda really had to do very little because we had established a long history of good responsible business practice,'' Dr. Gibbons said.

"Mr. Mitchell was making a mistake lumping us with other jurisdictions,'' he continued.

"We have long held that Bermuda is not a harmful tax jurisdiction. We have long had in place regulations that address several of the OECD concerns including know your customer, no secrecy in banking, the fact that substantive business must take place here and that businesses cannot be just a brass plaque on the wall.

"Bermuda has had to make very little in the way of changes to comply with the OECD and to a large degree Mr. Mitchell has misinterpreted how little we have had to "surrender'','' he added.

Dr. Gibbons held that Mr. Mitchell was primarily concerned with tax issues and noted that including Bermuda in his argument "is not correct because no changes to our tax structure will occur''.

"Government have committed only to general principles,'' said Mrs. Philip Bassett.

"We already follow most and don't anticipate any wholesale changes for the purposes of Bermuda. There will be no changes to the tax regime, not now, not in the future,'' she added.

"I think Bermuda is quite lucky to be in the position we are in. From Bermuda's standpoint it was the best point of action there have been no huge structural changes and we will continue to attract businesses not perturbed by transparency issues.'' Dr. Gibbons pointed out that the OECD recognises low tax jurisdictions but charged that Mr. Cox has been remiss in "communication'' and differentiating Bermuda from other jurisdictions''.

"He really needed to get the word out that Bermuda is a world class jurisdiction and stress that we have always had good regulation,'' he said.

"In late 1998 we gave our first response to the OECD and we told them that we didn't match their criteria as a harmful jurisdiction,'' Dr. Gibbons continued.

"But unfortunately Mr. Cox has failed at communicating and so we found ourselves recently lumped with the harmful jurisdictions.'' Mr. Cox has repeatedly refused to make public the annex which contains the details of the deal Government have signed with the OECD and Dr. Gibbons held that this has allowed speculation and heightened uncertainty on its contents.

He suggested that Bermuda follow the Cayman Islands who recently made their annex public.

"Mr. Cox needs to make the annex public and that will dispel these types of comments as people will be able to see clearly just how little we have `surrendered','' he said.