Municipal elections scheduled to take place in May are expected to be pushed back to next year by the Government.

Zane DeSilva, the Minister of Housing and Municipalities, tabled a Bill in the House of Assembly on Friday “to provide for the next ordinary municipal election to be held in 2026, not 2025“.

Elections for officials in the Corporation of Hamilton and the Corporation of St George are typically held every two years, with the last elections being held in May 2023.

Legislation passed by MPs in 2019 would give the minister responsible for the two bodies the power to appoint mayors and half the councillors, with the rest of the councillors chosen by a selection committee.

The Bill to reform municipalities was subsequently rejected by senators but it resulted in a civil case launched by the Corporation of Hamilton, which was heard by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council last December, with the court yet to deliver a ruling.

Michael Fahy, the Shadow Minister of Housing, Municipalities and Home Affairs, said this month that the Government needed to confirm whether voters would be going to the polls in May.

Mr DeSilva tabled the Municipalities Amendment Act 2025, which, if passed, would make clear the position for this year: “For the avoidance of doubt, an ordinary municipal election shall not be held in 2025.”

The Bill will be debated during the next sitting of the House next Friday.

Charles Gosling, the Mayor of Hamilton, said: “We understand the Government's decision and confirm that we were consulted on this matter prior to the announcement in the House.

“While it is not our place to comment on the Government's intentions, as that responsibility lies with them, we view this as a foundational step towards fostering a collaborative and positive relationship.

“The potential benefits of a successful partnership far outweigh any risks, and we remain mindful of the many individuals whose livelihoods are intertwined in this process — far beyond the roles of any single minister or mayor.”

Municipalities are governed at present by a mayor and councillors elected by residents and businesses.

Despite the Upper House’s rejection of the reform Bill six years ago, the Corporation of Hamilton pressed on with its constitutional claim against the legislation on the basis that the Bill could be presented in the House of Assembly a second time and would no longer need the approval of senators.

The corporation failed to block the Bill in the Supreme Court and in the Court of Appeal, when it claimed that it would be deprived of its property and its right to the protection of law if the Bill and parts of various associated amendment Acts came into effect.

Mr Fahy said yesterday: “The tabling of the Municipalities Amendment Bill 2025 to postpone municipal elections for one year is indicative of the disorganised methodology of the Government’s plan to take over the corporations of Hamilton and St George.

“Presumably, the postponement is being sought in anticipation of the Privy Council judgment.

“The postponement is problematic. When the current slate of candidates was elected, they were elected for a specific term.

“It is bad practice to ignore the will of the elector and simply increase the term of existing officials. Elections should be held, as was anticipated, in 2025.”

The One Bermuda Alliance MP added: “Further, the corporations’ staff members surely would like some certainty for the next two years.

“D-Day could potentially be just around the corner with this plan.

“Further, should the Government be successful in the Privy Council, legislation to take over the corporations will need to be re-tabled and, if it passes, the current team in place would be a lame duck administration and existing knowledge on corporation matters would simply disappear.

“A two-year transition period would make more sense.

“It seems more sensible to hold elections and allow a full two-year term to occur.

“With that said, we will no doubt be treated to some full and unequivocal reasoning on Friday when the Bill is debated in Parliament.”

The Government was contacted yesterday for the opportunity to respond to Mr Fahy’s remarks.

• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding court cases. As we are legally liable for any libellous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers