GEORGE TOWN, Cayman Islands (GIS) — Bermudian government officials reviewed Cayman’s experiences with Freedom of Information (FOI) during an official visit last week.

The country’s two Cabinet Office policy analysts Kimberley McKeown and Marisa Sharp spent three days in Cayman. Because Bermuda hopes to soon introduce its own FOI legislation, the visitors examined Cayman’s overall philosophy and implementation strategies, as well as its issues, challenges and corresponding legislation.

Their agenda included a retreat with the FOI steering committee, as well as meetings with the Cabinet Secretary (under whom the FOI Office falls) and the Cabinet Office’s Director of Special Projects; the Portfolio of the Civil Service; the Information Commissioner; Government Information Services; the Cayman Islands National Archives; and the FOI Unit.

The Bermudians also met with Cayman government’s information managers network, and reviewed the FOI information-sharing software programme (JADE) custom-designed by the Computer Services Department.

Cayman’s FOI Coordinator Carole Excell welcomed the Bermuda visit, and the opportunity to lend insight into the FOI development process. She added, “As we keep learning through the implementation process I hope that members of the public will continue to learn about FOI and advise us of how the system is working. It is about striving for continuous improvement. This was an opportunity for us to share our views on best practices and the challenges in implementation with the visiting officials”

FOI was launched in Cayman in January 2009, and the participation and involvement of the public has been robust, Excell noted.

The public was obviously unimpressed as the Opposition United Democratic Party (UDP) took a commanding position in the polls (with more than 80% turnout), while voters largely rejected the wide array of independent candidates.

Cayman also yesterday passed a separate referendum on a new draft constitution that features some “modern” features missing from Bermuda’s own, reinforcing the checks and balances of local government.

“The Freedom of Information Law is a good marketing tool for Cayman as it shows we are serious about transparency in government and statutory authorities.  Likewise the Complaints Commissioner does a good job shining light [and] the Anti-Corruption Commission, when it finally gets constituted and operational, will be a third leg in the fight.  It is taking awhile to get people both in government and the private sector to recognise that the traditional knee-jerk culture of secrecy that is trotted out as a defence to disclosure and accountability, regardless of the circumstances, has got to change. But the key is to balance this with protecting the legitimate right to privacy.”

Bermuda needs to understand this.

For the first time, there are more candidates who have declared themselves as independent (22) than candidates affiliated with the island’s two parties (21), the incumbent People’s Progressive Movement (PPM) and opposition United Democratic Party (UDP).

Local political observers agree that the flurry of independents – who are distributed across all six voting districts – suggests a frustration with party politics and the perception that self-interest motivates Caymanian politicians.

This trend appears to be a particular condemnation of the PPM, which holds 10 out of the 15 seats in the Legislative Assembly.  The PPM have been in office for four years after a major victory in the 2005 elections running on a theme of change.

There is much angst in Bermuda whether our own two-party system inhibits the proper flow of democratic checks and balances, focussing more on partisan axe-grinding than on governance issues.  Many will watch the Cayman election with interest.

Accompanying the draft are three letters from Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) Minister for Overseas Territories Gillian Merron, detailing the terms under which the Cayman Islands can negotiate foreign treaties on its own; constraining both the governor’s and Privy Council’s power to legislate unilaterally for the Cayman Islands; and outlining how constitutional change can be achieved in the future.

A few features:

First, a National Security Council chaired by the Governor and composed of the Premier, two other elected Ministers, the Leader of the Opposition and two representatives of civic society as well as the Deputy Governor, the Attorney General and the Commissioner of Police. The Governor will normally be expected to follow its advice on policy matters. But the wide membership and the exclusion from its remit of operational and staffing matters mean that the police will not be subject to undue political interference.

Second, a Judicial and Legal Services Commission chaired by a lay member and composed of local and overseas judges, local lawyers, and members of the public. This will ensure that people appointed to be judges and to a few other key positions such as the Attorney General, and the standards expected of them, are both of a high professional calibre and suit the circumstances of the Cayman Islands.

Third, a Commission for Standards in Public Life chaired by and composed of local people outside politics and the public service. This independent body will have a wide-ranging remit to ensure high standards in the Legislative Assembly, Cabinet, and across the public service.

A few things there that Bermudians might like to have.

But, the Cayman Islands have sought to further differentiate themselves in “good governance”.   Last summer, they also a passed an Anti-Corruption law giving effect to two important international conventions:

• United Nations Convention against Corruption
• OECD Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions

The Cayman Attorney General last week announced that they are holding training over the next two months for public officers and others (such as those who serve on statutory authorities), with the goal of commencing enforcement of the law shortly thereafter.

Bermuda has not sought to enshrine these important international conventions in local law.  Why not?

It’s now been several years since the first “unethical but not illegal” flare ups, where even the Director of Public Prosecutions admitted that Bermuda’s laws in these areas are inadequate.

It’s time for action.

In 1983 just 10 percent of America’s corporate profits were funneled through places that charge little or no corporate income tax; today more than 25 percent of profits go through tax havens. The Obama administration could tell the Caymans—now fifth in the world in bank deposits—to repeal its bank secrecy laws or be invaded; since the island nation’s total armed forces consists of about 300 police officers, it shouldn’t be hard for technicians and auditors, accompanied by a few Marines, to fly in and seize all the records. Bermuda, which relies on the Royal Navy for its military, could be next, and so on. Long before we get to Switzerland and Luxembourg, their governments should have gotten the message. Barring gunboat diplomacy (tempting as it is), there is no reason we cannot pass laws to block financial transactions with tax havens or even, Cuba-style, make it a crime for Americans to visit or do business with them without special permission.

You know you have an image problem when even the progressives feel free to go all “Dick Cheney-like” on you.

On a separate note, was Rev. Al Sharpton here for New Years, or was I totally seeing things?