As such, residents should not be surprised by recent planning decisions which appear to conflict with the pillars of sustainable development ? conservation and preservation.

Nor should organisations with a vested interest in the promotion of such concepts, expect to be included in the decision-making process on environmental issues.

Such arguments were put forward yesterday by economist Robert Stewart. A former chief executive officer of Shell Bermuda Ltd. and the author of , he publicly criticised the plan from the outset, largely because Government's initial document on sustainable development sent to householders delved into so many issues unrelated to the environment.

He has been asked to participate in a public meeting on sustainable development on September 19 to deliver his opinions on the subject as a panel member.

Asked what he thought of the sustainable development draft presented last month, , Mr. Stewart gave it zero out of ten marks.

"Like most people, you're assuming automatically that the Sustainable Development Plan has something to do with the environment but, of course, it has little to do with the environment, the words are really a disguise for a social engineering programme for Bermudians," he said.

Only recently, developer Gilbert Lopes was given a Special Development Order (SDO) to build 96 affordable condos on the site of the old Loughlands Guest House without any planning application being filed.

According to former Planning Department head Erwin Adderley, the complete absence of publicly available plans is unprecedented.

On Wednesday, Government announced plans to rebuild King Edward VII Hospital in the middle of the Botanical Gardens. The Bermuda National Trust wasn't invited to participate in the meetings which led to that outcome.

It has been argued such decisions run contrary to the concept of sustainable development as recently debated on the island.

According to Mr. Stewart, the problem is that the commonly understood interpretation of the phrase 'sustainable development', is not what is being applied here. He believes the phrase was most likely chosen because few residents would find anything objectionable about conservation and preservation.

"What Government has produced has everything to do with changing the character of Bermuda society. The Sustainable Development report has little to do with sustainable development. It's like calling a donkey a thoroughbred horse because you stick a saddle and a jockey on it.

"If you read the Sustainable Development report, it has very little about the environment in it. It was given those words to make people feel good. Anyone who is critical of it appears to be against the environment when really it's about a bunch of civil servants creating jobs and high salaries for themselves."

Yesterday, this newspaper left a message for the chairman of the Sustainable Development roundtable, Malcolm Butterfield, asking for his opinion, but he did not return our call.

In an interview with the last year, however, he explained the role the roundtable intended to play in raising awareness on the subject: "It should be made very clear that our major purpose is to be an independent voice of the Bermuda public.

"I've used the word 'independent' rather loosely but to some extent deliberately. Because our role is to bring issues to the floor that could challenge Government, could challenge the business community and could challenge the Bermuda public."

Mr. Stewart described the ongoing sustainable development meetings as little more than a "camouflage", designed to give the appearance of public consultation.

"People come and make comments. I'm sure many comments will not have been considered simply because they've said things the Government wouldn't like to hear. If you look at how governments generally operate ? they hold meetings to appear they're consulting with people. It's all a sham."

As an example, Mr. Stewart highlighted the recent Bermuda Independence Commission.

"It was a fig leaf to give respectability to conclusions already reached by Government. Sustainable development is pretty much the same and 99 per cent (of residents will probably) say it's a wonderful report without having read what it really is about."

Mr. Stewart said he was sceptical of the plan from the outset, put off by a synopsis Government sent to householders last summer.

"I read it and it was absolute gibberish," he said, referring to the host of issues it promised to tackle.

"Black economic empowerment, affordable housing, job opportunities, education, distribution of wealth, foreign investment, balance of payments, fair trade, everything under the sun and nothing to do with the environment."

Worse, Mr. Stewart claimed he found several economic fallacies in the most recent report ? 25 before he had even reached page 42.

"The biggest fallacy of all has to do with Bermuda's population growth. Everybody associated with the report assumes that as the population of the world gets bigger, it's a bad thing because of limited space and so on and so we must put in place birth control methods or steps to improve open spaces.

"But if you look at it in a logical way, it's not so much that more people are arriving on earth, but that people are living longer."

The United States was the richest country in the world 100 years ago, he explained. Despite the relative degree of opulence, men could only expect to live to the age of 49. Women had a promised age of 53.

"Today, with our advanced economies, men have a life expectancy of 78; women of 85. In places like Japan and Sweden, you can add another five or six years to that. So life expectancy has increased by approximately 50 per cent.

"If people are living longer, by definition that's a good thing but the report on sustainable development considers it a bad thing because there's an increased number of people.

"Another fallacy is that Bermuda should discontinue its reliance on imports and grow our own food. There's so much in storage in the United States and Europe. Why would we use our open spaces in that respect to grow products no one wants?

"The Sustainable Development report says we should become more self-sufficient. There's no reason to do that. The entire world is moving in the opposite direction. It's nonsensical."

However, the "classic" fallacy purported in the report is with regard to affordable housing. According to Mr. Stewart, the suggested solution to the island-wide crisis is to impose greater rent control.

"We've had rent control since 1972 and the housing situation is now a lot worse. So what they're suggesting is more of the same medicine that hasn't worked for 34 years. You read that and think, 'What idiot would have written that? What government would endorse that'?"

As described by Mr. Stewart, the problem is that the Sustainable Development team "does not and cannot possibly know how to run a complicated society such as Bermuda".

"A book written 50 years ago by Friederich Hayek, which won a Nobel Prize in 1973, says that the amount of knowledge on earth is so great that it cannot be possessed, be known or understood by one group of people. It's not possible.

"And it's one of the reasons why the sustainable development project is impossible to implement. A small group of planners can never capture the knowledge necessary. Let's assume (they are) a bunch of Einsteins. If so, why are they working for Government and making $120,000 or so? Why not work on Wall Street and make $120 million?"

He added that governments around the world, including eastern Europe, China, Bolivia and Argentina, have made frequent attempts at implementing sustainable development plans into their societies. In the United States, President Lyndon Johnson attempted to create a system to abolish poverty ? today it remains as prevalent.

"It's been a resounding failure in every country. What makes Bermuda so confident it would be a success here? When you look at the activities of the Bermuda Government, one-quarter of the population works for the Civil Service, the number of children who will come out of school and not be able to read, write and count in any significant way ? between 30 and 40 per cent have their prospects stunted by an incompetent Department of Education.

"They can't enforce the speed limit. And so, when you look at the various activities of the Government and consider (all the issues the Sustainable Development report intends to tackle) it's just crazy. It's nothing more than a public relations stunt."