Former Premier Sir John Swan’s recent contribution of ideas about how to stimulate the economy has been discussed intensely over the past week. And rightly so. Bermuda is in need of innovative, immediately actionable ideas to generate revenue, provide jobs and grow the economy. We need to debate, assess and come to some conclusions quickly if we are to reverse the trend weakening so many countries worldwide. What we need not do, however, is make changes for the sake of “economic growth” which marginalises or weakens the citizens of this country.Many of Sir John’s proposals make sense, having been collated from a number of sources which spent considerable time researching them: developing the waterfront, tax relief, cancellation of some tax freebies, etc. These ideas have been mulled around for a while and embraced by many.What I find profoundly problematic is the call for the abandonment of the 60/40 rule and the significant opening up of the property market to foreign investors. These are transformative policy shifts and must be discussed in the context of this critical question: What kind of Bermuda do we want to create and for whose benefit?The 60/40 rule requiring companies doing business in Bermuda be beneficially owned by 60 percent Bermudian shareholders has been relaxed as the capital requirements of certain sectors increased tourism, telecommunications, banking, for example. There will no doubt be other areas where it makes sense to abolish 60/40, but to abandon it wholesale will create a dramatically different, and not necessarily better Bermuda. Given Bermuda’s small economic size it is entirely possible for international capital to gobble up most businesses. Free traders and those who call for the elimination of all forms of protectionism celebrate open markets and see it as a sign of progress. Do we want a Bermuda where most of the businesses are not owned by locals? Are we content to be employees and not equity partners? What do you see as the consequences? Does it matter?We can attract high-end brands to Bermuda within the framework of 60/40 as the presence of Louis Vuitton, Rolex and Ferragamo attest. And as the person who secured the licence for the McDonalds fast food franchise in Bermuda in the mid-1990s, Mr Swan knows Bermudians constantly seek opportunities with well-known brands internationally. Under the right economic circumstances this can re-emerge.I support allowing PRC holders to buy property in any category they have the right to live here and in my view should have rights similar to permanent residents in the US and Canada. But opening up the real estate market significantly to foreign investors/owners will put a great deal of upward pressure on prices. People in the industry will benefit but it will make it even more difficult for first time homeowners. Again, we need to ask about the kind of Bermuda we want to create. Where do the majority of us, the hard-working Bermudians fit into this picture?These are but two issues of the multitude proposed by Sir John that need to be discussed extensively; we need real debate on these and then come to a collective position. The overriding focus has to be making Bermuda stronger for the benefit of Bermudians, first. Any approach which makes this a secondary consideration or have Bermudians as the perceived beneficiary through a trickle-down theory will not resonate with the people. Let us continue with this debate.l Walton Brown is a social and political commentator. Follow his blog on www.respicefinem1.blogspot.com. He can be contacted at walton[AT]researchmix.com