Vexed Bermoothes

Senator Walton Brown is all over the news and talk radio decrying the public complaints about weaknesses in the draft PATI law as a “deliberate distortion of reality”.

He went on to describe how the section to allow the Minister to amend the PATI law by regulation was only intended to simplify updates to the law going forward.  He went on to give examples about hiring staff and setting fees.

But he neglected to mention the main bone of contention, found in section 58(1)(d), which gives the Minister the power to remove public authorities from the law’s coverage by negative resolution.

In my opinion, that’s the deliberate distortion.

The negative resolution process may be applicable to commercial laws that require frequent updates that are rarely controversial.

But the PATI public access to information law is different.  It is a human rights law.  It will be controversial at times, and subject to the tremendous political impulse to tamper.  The PATI law is intended to apply to all public authorities, and all entities that receive significant public funding.  Full stop.   Any changes to the law must go through a vigorous Parliamentary process.

So what if Parliament must vote on amendments!  That’s their job.  If the system is inefficient, then reform it to work better.  Pass proposed legislation through committees so that, when it comes to the floor, the controversial areas have already been worked out!

Here are a few PATI submissions from ‘roun de web:

• Politics
• Catch a Starling
• That Bye in St Dawids
• Stuart Hayward (in the Bermuda Sun)
• Article 19 (international PATI specialist)
• Bermuda Democratic Alliance (on Facebook)
• United Bermuda Party (very thorough)