A performing legislature would target those laws for improvement.  Mutter, cough, platinum.

The UK current has a new Draft Bribery Bill to update their laws to deal more effectively with corruption – in both the public and corporate sector – whether it occurs in the UK or overseas.  In many respects, it brings the UK law to par with the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions, and others.

The new UK Bill clarifies offences relating to bribing and being bribed, the obligation of organisations to prevent bribery, and the global application of the law.  Here’s an interesting line from the Bill:

… even though the actions in question take place abroad, they still constitute the offence if the person performing them is a British national or resident, a national of a British overseas territory or a body incorporated in the United Kingdom.

Oh, really?

The UK made clear in the 1999 white paper concerning the Overseas Territories that it had a responsibility to help the OTs meet the international obligations to which the UK itself had committed (and to which the OTs would be expected to comply should they become independent).

International obligations applying to the Overseas Territories are likely, over the next decade, to become more demanding in many of these areas, in some of which the Overseas Territories themselves lack technical expertise and institutional capacity.  In essence the UK is acting as the transmission mechanism by which an ever growing corpus of global regulation is applied to the territories.  Were an Overseas Territories to choose independence (where this is an option), the implementation of international rules would be a matter between them and the organisation concerned.  But while the Overseas Territories choose to remain British, the UK has the obligation to ensure that they implement such measures.

With the constant circus of allegations and murky affairs, Bermuda needs anti-corruption legislation for its local sector.

But we also apparently need it for our international sector.  You know, if we really want to the The Gold Standard™.

The US has solid anti-corruption regimes – that include both the public and corporate sectors – and under the Obama administration seems to be stepping up enforcement.  The Financial Times reports:

US companies account for 64 out of 93 cases being pursued by the Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission — Britain, Bermuda and the Cayman Islands are in second, third and fourth places…

Bruce Yannett, partner at Debevoise & Plimpton, the US law firm, told the FT that while there were a number of factors behind the large number of British-linked probes in the US, one was Washington’s unhappiness with London’s performance on tackling bribery. “If the US authorities feel there is weak enforcement, they will play the role of policeman”

The US data raises further questions about the role of corruption conduits played by leading offshore financial centres, many of which are British overseas territories or dependencies.

Helen Garlick, former head of the Serious Fraud Office’s anti-corruption unit and a consultant at Nardello & Co, a private investigator, told the FT that Britain’s dependencies tended “to be the place where so much dirty money ends up. Any forceful overseas corruption investigation is bound to end up there sooner or later“.

This is not a list we want to be on.  So, are we serious about reform?

Sometimes though, I have to shake my head in wonder.  The latest issue has an apologist view of the governance issues in our current Government, saying that past administrations were no different:

“The day is late on their [the UBP and media] behalf to be talking about corruption, cronyism and nepotism, for their sword of ethics and morality is dull on both sides from way back in time.

The question to ask, is cronyism and nepotism ethical?  It may not be, but I have yet to see any newly elected government come out of the front doors of any parliament anywhere in the world and announce to the world how they would be awarding juicy million dollar contracts to any of their freinds and supporters.  They just don’t do it.

I could bet you that those in the UBP can’t wait to win back government so they too can get back to doing all of that which they have been accusing the PLP government of doing. “

This circular logic gets Bermuda nowhere.  Is the writer implying that “to the victor go the spoils – but just don’t talk about it?”  Government is not a sow to be milked for inside interests – particularly with our recent billion dollar budgets.   Two wrongs don’t make a right.  Good governance is the goal – not playing a game of tit for tat that goes on for generations.

I support the comments of UBP MP Donte Hunt in todays’ press calling for Government to champion anti-corruption legislation.  It’s not about “whose hands are the cleanest” … it’s about establishing high standards for our elected representatives of the future, as well as our ever-increasingly powerful civil service.

“It is totally unacceptable to excuse or nullify any form of corruption based on the view that Governments of the past have operated in such a manner and did nothing to resolve the issue.”

That view did nothing to mature Bermuda but instead kept the Island in perpetual regression and moral decay, said Mr. Hunt.

“It is the mandate of every Government in every new term of service to correct the wrongs of the past, improve on the milestones of yesterday and ultimately drive to make their jurisdiction a better place.”

Change came to Bermuda with the election of the PLP – and one of those changes is that when the UBP (or whatever grouping may arise) is elected to Government, the expectations placed on them will be much higher. Bermuda society has not been dominated by a “forty theives” for decades – there is much greater diversity in our power structures and corporate entities. So why are we still worrying about which insiders’ turn it is to suck at the teat of Government largesse?

One day, the impact of old identity politics will fade – and voters will place much greater emphasis on good governance TODAY and TOMORROW rather than the  battles of yesterday.  Learn from the past: serve the public, everyone, equitably.