OBA Senator On Govt PATI Amendment
The OBA “voted against the Government’s PATI Amendment Act, which weakens and restricts PATI,” Senator Douglas De Couto said.
Senator De Couto said, “Bermuda’s Public Access to Information Act [PATI] is an important tool to increase the Government’s accountability and transparency to the people of Bermuda. That’s why in the Senate the One Bermuda Alliance voted against the Government’s PATI Amendment Act, which weakens and restricts PATI.
“This Act creates new fees and adds time limits that allow departments to deny requests. But Government has done nothing to improve the ability of public officers to handle PATI requests or increase transparency by default. For example, by supplying training and resources.
“Remember, it was PATI that enabled Bermuda to find out that $16.5m of taxpayer’s money has been wasted on the failed Gaming Commission.
“It was PATI that enabled Bermuda to learn how the Government had to step in and pay $11m of severance payments that Gencom could not, when the Fairmont Southampton was closed.
“It was PATI that enabled to Bermuda to learn the details of how BELCO pollution was affecting Pembroke residents, and the problems with the Historical Land Loss Commission of Inquiry.
“These are just some of the many topics of important public interest that we learned from PATI, and which the Government would have preferred you not to know. In fact, this Government has as a rule fought tooth and nail to hide any and all information from the public.
“Remember, PATI is not just for the newspapers and politicians. It’s also for Mr. and Mrs. Smith who need to get information about how Government has treated them, or a civil servant or member of the uniformed services who may not have been treated fairly, for example. And PATI should be for everyone, even if they cannot afford the fees.
“Government says that the proposed changes are ‘the same’ as those in other jurisdictions, but that’s not true. Don’t believe me? The Information Commissioner says they ‘fall short of the comprehensive and well-established legislative frameworks found in other Jurisdictions’, and ‘lack important and well-established safeguards’.
“And other jurisdictions have better support and funding for their PATI equivalents, and better rules that make Government information public by default. This alone would reduce the so-called administrative burden from PATI. In fact, in our platform, the One Bermuda Alliance pledges to be a Government that is ‘Accountable to the People’, including open data portals for financial records, meeting records and performance reports.
“So ask yourself: why is the Government trying to make it easier to hide from you?”
If PATI was used for practical means this would not be necessary, but the opposition and some media sources use it as a means of agitation and distraction and fail to realize or appreciate the amount of work that it takes public officers to research and compile the data. In their quest to solely cast aspersions on the elected government, they end up taking valuable resources from day to day tasks, which has a knock on effect on productivity.
Lmao not true at all that’s what the PLP want you to think. PATI is extremely important. How else would we find out about secretive contracts and bad deals?! Besides its their job to compile data, etc stop complaining over something all the other countries in the world do. Charging is fine but to say its not practical you’re silly!
If you see the numbers of hours dedicated to these questions, that could be utilized actually on the delivery of services, then one can definitely say that it is not practical or efficient or the best use of time and resources to answer tedious questions for political point scoring.
Elaborate please. And please identify your sources of information.
Exactly how many hours have Government Ministries and Departments expended attempting “to answer tedious questions for political point scoring” in the period 1 January through 30 November 2024?
First, i dont believe it would take a reasonably skillful person the amount of time they are claiming it would take – they either have the wrong people doing this work or they are grossly over reporting the hours it takes.
Second, that is absolutely no excuse for blocking access all together.
They want to hide what they are doing full stop
Imagine thinking transparency is ‘political point scoring.’
How does one become such a sycophant?
Come on, Watching. I’m waiting.
Imaging living in a democracy and arguing against transparency.
If the truth casts ‘aspersions on the elected Government’ then whose fault is that?
You truly hate BDA. You love the PLP, but you hate BDA.
Has that analysis actually been done?
The PATI Act was more government friendly when it was first introduced. The Government could claim openness and accountability for years before the first Information Commissioner was appointed and the PATI Act was given teeth.
Someone should start a go fund me page to help fund these requests. If they have nothing to hide, why are they concerned?