An early-hours sensation saw the so-called "People's Five'' UBP rebels side with the Opposition to back the debating of an amended motion of censure against Premier David Saul.

Acting Opposition Leader Jennifer Smith tabled several amendments -- including deleting references to Sir John Swan's Grape Bay Ltd and McDonald's -- and won a vote to proceed on that basis 21-16.

And the UBP rebels sided with the PLP again after an angry debate to force the motion through by the same margin.

The final motion presented to the House read that Premier David Saul should be censured on seven counts.

The motion accused Dr Saul of "Disregarding the public interest and their right to be heard on the issue of a change in Monetary Authority Policy and; "Failing to apprehend, appreciate or grasp the degree of public unsettlement, opposition and disapproval of the decision to alter the Monetary Authority policy and to allow a franchise operation in breach of a long-standing and beneficial policy as provided for in the Bermuda Monetary Authority guidelines of May 30, 1995.'' Other clauses in the motion alleged that Dr. Saul "contributed to the disruption of the House by causing the Attorney General to give advice on a Private Member's Bill "which said advice subsequently had the effect of influencing the legislative process.'' The motion further accused Dr. Saul of failing to act on a petition opposing the opening of a fast food franchise, failing to take account "the depth of feelings'' about an "apparent secret change'' to the May 1995 BMA guidelines and failing to protect existing restaurants and lunch wagons.

Ms Smith told the House that the anti-franchise policy drawn up by the Bermuda Monetary Authority was "clear and precise and its objectives are clear and precise.'' She said: "In the light of these guidelines being clear and precise and beneficial the Honourable Member's (Dr. Saul) suggestion he was considering some kind of change was wholly inappropriate.'' Ms. Smith added that Government's signals over the whole affair had been confusing, with no clarification that the existing situation had changed, or if it had changed, how it had changed.

And she said: "Franchises have a very large advertising budget and much of it is directed at children. It's unbelievable that local companies could compete with such franchises. It is a dereliction of duty not to tackle the threat posed to local businesses.

"If there were loopholes in the policy they should have been closed. If there was something wrong with the policy, proper action should have been taken to amend it.'' She added: "The public is concerned about level playing fields, pay-offs and concerned about policy changes. It should have been clear to the Member (Dr.

Saul) that there was a public perception which needed to be addressed.'' And Ms. Smith said: "In relaxing a long-standing policy like this, it may in fact be something Bermuda should do -- but the manner in which it was done would set a precedent that was untoward and in no way calm the fears that that nothing untoward had been happening.'' She added the Attorney General's Chambers was to represent the Crown and Parliamentary responsibilities included helping to draft bills and offer advice.

But Ms. Smith said: "When a law officer gives advice on a matter, it's not normally laid before Parliament as part of the debate....it's confidential.'' She added that, in an interview with The Royal Gazette on June 8, Dr. Saul outlined the involvement in the dissemination of the faxed advice from the Attorney-General Chambers.

And Ms Smith said: "The decision, or indecision if you will, was ill-conceived and has really brought this House into disrepute.

"It is right for this Honourable House to to deliberate on this and look at the actions and omissions and to agree that he has been deserving of the censure of this Honourable House.'' Deputy Premier Jerome Dill was first on his feet to defend the party leader.

And he dismissed the motion of censure as "vicious, ludicrous, nonsensical and offensive.'' Mr. Dill added that all the Premier was guilty of was backing something which other members disagreed with.

And he pointed out that an MP had never been censured since the present written constitution was adopted in 1968.

He added: "There has never been a Premier of this House censured. It's a very significant action and one which this House ought not to take lightly.'' Mr. Dill added that it was also significant that the motion being debated was not the first draft, but the third, which suggested someone else was supplying the ammunition to the Opposition for their own ends.

And he warned: "Any one of us could find ourselves in a position where we can be criticised on the floor of the House after we have debated a motion.'' He added there was no precedent -- in Bermuda or the entire Commonwealth -- for a similar censure motion.

"There is no precedent of censuring someone for `failing to apprehend' or `failing to recognise'. '' And he warned: "If this House is responsible, as has been suggested, for the creation of a precedent here this evening based on this piece of nonsense it will be a very sad day indeed for this House.'' Earlier Mr. Dill said the motion was also an attack on the integrity of Speaker Ernest DeCouto -- but was forced to withdraw the remark after the Speaker intervened.

Labour and Home Affairs Minister Quinton Edness said Mr. Dill had done a good job in proving the motion was not Parlaimentary procedures.

He said: "It's about damaging the character of a Member of this House and it's appalling this should happen. It's a motion which has been put down with a specific motive in mind.'' He asked where did the Premier disregard the public interest and when did he deny the public the right to be heard.

Mr. Edness said: "It didn't happen. The Honourable Member (Dr. Saul) had an opinion which disagreed with the opinions of others and it is this, in fact, what he is being censured for and this is why this motion is being debated -- its nonsensical.

"This particular institution, the House of Assembly, is the epitome of freedom of speech -- if we have to be censured because we have a difference of opinion, we are going to interfere with this very freedom, which has been so hard fought for.'' Mr. Edness pointed out that granting permission to Grape Bay Ltd to operate a McDonald's burger joint was not against the law and that motions of censure elsewhere had been for "mishandling of money or some other major thing, bordering sometimes almost on criminality.'' He compared the motion of censure to the row surrounding Sir John Stubbs' controversial bill to legalise gay sex.

And he asked if the House should censure Opposition Leader Frederick Wade for disregarding the opinion of the churches.

He told Ms. Smith she had been "used'' and that she "she should go back to the school of politics and pay some dues.'' Former Premier Sir John Swan , whose application started the burger wars, said the motion was "disturbing.'' He said: "We have a responsibility ....to protect the character and freedom of individuals.'' Sir John added: "The Members know that they could not win a motion of censure against Government and therefore pointed it at the Premier. It's intended to bring down the Premier, not Government.'' He said: "What we are talking about is the Leader of our Country -- what we should understand is that unless there is something of a substantial nature, the motion should not have been allowed in this House in the first place.'' Lois Browne Evans said that if a politician could not stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen.

Mrs. Browne Evans said the United Bermuda Party had employed the "lowest tricks'' to stay in power.

And the UBP had no grounds to accuse the Progressive Labour Party of stooping low by bringing forward the censure motion.

"I am very proud of Jennifer Smith and the way she has handled the motion,'' said Mrs. Browne Evans.

The UBP would love to have someone of Ms Smith's calibre on their side, she added.

"The arrogance of the UBP has been shattered.'' Government backbencher Maxwell Burgess , MP for Hamilton Parish West, rejected the motion, saying 73 percent of those polled in a survey saw no problem with fast food franchises.

Mr. Burgess, one of the principals of Grape Bay Ltd. which won approval from Finance Minister Grant Gibbons to operate McDonald's in Bermuda, also dismissed claims there had been a change in policy on franchises.

It was also incorrect, he said, to accuse Dr. Saul of failing to act on a petition opposing the opening of a fast food franchise in Bermuda.

"The Premier accepted the petition and heard the concerns.'' To Opposition jeers, Mr. Burgess continued: "I am determined to defend the Premier and uphold justice.

"I will err on the side of equity, justice and fairness.'' Mr. Burgess said he was sure, if Opposition members were allowed to vote freely, the motion would fail.

"I am confident all right-thinking members will vote it down.'' Shadow Tourism Minister David Allen believed the motion highlighted public concerns and interests.

There was widespread concern, he said, at the way Dr. Saul had acted with impunity and disregard for public welfare.

Mr. Allen said MPs still had standards of behaviour -- and it was clear the Premier had failed to live up to them.

That was why the motion had become necessary.

It was almost unseemly, continued Mr. Allen, for former Premier Sir John Swan and Mr. Burgess, both principals of Grape Bay, to come to Dr. Saul's defence.

And as the pair spoke, one could feel sorry for Dr. Saul; their speeches sank him.

"It was like strapping two concrete bricks around his ankles.'' Mr. Allen said Bermuda was in uproar over Dr. Saul's behaviour, which had lowered the regard people had for the House of Assembly.

The change in franchise policy had been Bermuda's best kept secret.

"Clearly the goalposts were removed.'' Government backbencher and former Tourism Minister C.V. (Jim) Woolridge , one of the so-called "People's Five'', likened Dr. Saul's predicament to that of former US President Gerald Ford.

Ford was defeated by Carter after pardoning disgraced former President Richard Nixon, who came to grief over the Watergate scandal.

"Dr. Saul finds himself in this position.'' Mr. Woolridge said Dr. Saul's "sin'' was to allow Sir John Swan and Mr.

Burgess to become involved in something that was perceived as "out of the norm''.

There was no doubt Government had a policy against fast food franchises because of the effect they could have on existing restaurants.

"What happened? I learned that Grape Bay Ltd had been given permission for something everyone else was told was not available to them.'' Mr. Woolridge said he counted Dr. Saul as a friend -- but the buck stopped with the Premier.

"He failed to take action which should have been taken.'' Mr. Woolridge said the "People's Five'' wanted to retain the integrity of the House.

"I hope after this bloodletting we will get back on the right track.'' He added: "I feel sorry for Dr. Saul but sometimes we put ourselves in such a position, maybe because we don't want to say `no'.'' Deputy Opposition Leader Jennifer Smith said she brought forward the motion to reflect the public unsettlement, concern and disapproval at Dr. Saul's behaviour and mishandling of the franchise issue.

Such was the public unease, that Dr. Saul should have taken action.

"It's a question of where the buck stops.'' The future of Bermuda and its small businesses was threatened by the Premier's inaction.

Ms Smith said it was obvious Dr. Saul, from his comments in the Press, had anticipated the effect of the Attorney General's opinion on the legislative process.

She said Dr. Saul had known debate on Government rebel Ann Cartwright DeCouto's Prohibited Restaurant Act would have been thwarted.

"It is clear that the member has done nothing to clarify Government's approach to the protection of Bermuda's small restaurants and businesses.

"At the end of the day if Dr. Saul is not accountable, who is? The buck stops with him.'' Premier David Saul , who had sat through the debate with his eyes closed, occasionally chewing on his glasses, said he was grateful for the opportunity to respond.

He reminded the House of the oath of office had taken a year ago when he became Premier.

"I consider that this particular motion is a serious one, and not because it concerns me directly or personally.'' Dr. Saul said it was true a large percentage of Bermudians felt that any change in the fast food policy was not something in the Island's best interests.

"I am accused of having done nothing to quell the storm by my actions and inaction.'' Dr. Saul said it was easy now to look back with 20:20 hindsight and say the Premier should not have done X and should have done Y.

"It is stated that the policy on fast food franchises was clear and precise.

"I believe it is clear and precise. No permits will be given to a foreign company....that policy has not been breached.

"No foreign company has been allowed to come to Bermuda to compete against Bermudians.'' He added: "The policy has not changed. Yes, the policy is outdated and the policy needs to be rewritten.'' Dr. Saul said a survey revealed Bermudians were not uptight about fast food franchises, so long as they were local companies and were aesthetically pleasing.

"As far as I know it is the only empirical evidence we have.'' Dr. Saul said it was quite clear the PLP were not going to give him the benefit of any doubt.

"They will vote regardless of what I might say. I accept the buck stops here.

I am only human and I have made plenty of mistakes, and I will make plenty more.'' With some Opposition MPs accusing him of losing his cool, Dr. Saul likened his predicament to a person in a kangaroo court.

Deputy Opposition Leader Ms Smith stood up to protest, saying it appeared Dr.

Saul was referring to the House of Assembly as a "kangaroo court''. He should withdraw the remark, she said.

Dr. Saul said he was willing to withdraw the comment, but, turning to the Opposition benches, added: "I want to ask members of the House, have you made up your mind about the vote regardless of what I say?...I rest my case.''' Going through the motion's accusations, Dr. Saul rejected the claim he had disregarded the public interest and their right to be heard on the "issue of a change in Monetary Authority'' policy.

"The public had plenty of opportunity to be heard. They could come to our regular town meetings and speak,'' he said.

"But I have to say the issue never came up. They had their eye on other balls.'' He added an average of 65 people had been attending the town meetings.

Dr. Saul reiterated there had been no change in policy, adding a review of it was now underway.

"If I'm accused of not doing enough, then I apologise.'' Turning to the accusation he failed to apprehend, appreciate or grasp the degree of public unsettlement at the franchise decision, Dr. Saul said it was all well and good to have 20:20 hindsight.

"I am only human. If other people anticipated and knew exactly what was going to happen, if they knew that much, I take my hat off to them.'' Dr. Saul said numerous people had told him Government had acted correctly; numerous said the opposite.

"I listened to them all without fear or favour. I was guided by principles and matters of law. I am going to be censured for what I thought was right.'' On the charge he contributed to the disruption of the peace of the House by soliciting the Attorney General's opinion on the Prohibited Restaurant Act, Dr. Saul: "I want to take this one straight on the chin.'' Dr. Saul said he felt it had been his duty to get the advice of the Attorney General.

And it was his duty through the House Leader to inform the Speaker why Government was not going to vote for the bill.

"I never thought for a moment that would lead to disruption.'' Dr. Saul went on to reject the accusation he failed to act on an anti-franchise petition.

Motion of censure passed 21-16 From Page 4 Front Street, with tourists and locals canvassed alike.

Following the petition, he said he undertook to conduct an even more detailed review of franchise policies, which would come before the House.

It was not a question of receiving the petition and throwing it to one side, he said.

Dr. Saul continued by dismissing the claim he failed to "comprehend the depth of feelings surrounding an apparent secret change to Bermuda Monetary Authority policy guidelines''.

There was no secret policy change, he said.

And after about 25 Royal Gazette editorials on the franchise controversy, he had begun to comprehend the depth of feeling on the issue, he said. "It defeats me how members are supposed to censure me on this.'' He added: "I fully comprehend there are feelings out there in the public that what happened as a consequence of the incorporation of a local company has upset the community.'' Dr. Saul said he felt like a political football.

"I understand the PLP wants to beat me up, but I do hope no one will come up to me afterwards and say `David, nothing personal. No hard feelings.

"Nevertheless, I think there are some Honourable members on the other side who might empathise with my position.'' Dr. Saul stressed he had acted honourably and within the law.

"If all Honourable members have an open mind I think they will act accordingly. If they want to kick a political football, I am here to be kicked. I rest my case.

"I don't believe I have done anything illegal, like Richard Nixon.'' On the prospect of being censured, he said: "I think I am big enough to take it.'' After he sat down, he was patted on the back and congratulated by Deputy Leader Jerome Dill .

The motion passed 21 votes to 16, with Government rebels Mrs. Cartwright DeCouto, Mr. Woolridge, Mr. Moniz, Dr. Dyer and Clarence Terceira -- the so-called "People's Five'' -- siding with the Opposition.