Race is not the reason why there are two professional organisations for the medical profession, according to spokespersons for the Bermuda Medical Association (BMA) and the Bermuda Medical Society (BMS).

"Each organisation represents a racially diverse membership. The two organisations evolved to provide the medical profession with an opportunity to debate and discuss medical issues in a healthy and constructive manner," according to a joint statement released this week.

When asked by The Royal Gazette why it was necessary to have two organisations, most doctors contacted referred this newspaper back to the statement.

"We have two political parties too and we have two or three newspapers too," said Burton Butterfield one of the founders of the BMA. Beyond that he had no comment.

Andrew West, a former president of BMS, the older of the two organisations, echoed Dr. Butterfield's comments.

"People have different views as to the way they do things. They are very, very similar and I suspect they would be back to one group again," he said.

Cindy Morris, a past president of the BMA, told The Royal Gazette that there was a need for more open debate when asked why the organisation was formed.

"We needed a forum to have more open debates - it allowed for more time by having another meeting separately."

She added that while the BMS had been recognised by the Island's legislature historically, "we tend to deal with issues that were not necessarily legislative material".

"I don't think it is a big issue," said Wilbur Warner who belongs to both organisations. The BMA, he explained, was formed four or five years ago because a lot of doctors felt that the BMS was not filling their needs.

"There were a lot of issues including dealing with the insurance companies and physicians' relationship with the community. Some people felt that physicians should be doing more outreach so a bunch of physicians formed the second association. Neither association is a statutory body so a lot belong to either or both - it's purely voluntary."

And he echoed the official statement that race was not a factor. "There are people on both sides of the main racial divide in both groups - that was not a factor at all," he said.

The matter was brought up by ruling party Senator David Burch who questioned why there had to be two organisations representing doctors.

Negotiations with insurers over a revised fees schedule could have been a lot smoother if doctors spoke with one voice, the Senator suggested.

While some doctors think it might be a good idea to have just one organisation, Dr. Warner said he did not see the current situation as such a negative.

"It's given rise to some fresh thoughts but at the end of the day those thoughts are going in the same direction."

Dr. Warner said that representatives from both organisations were present during the negotiations with the insurers and had several meetings to iron out a common position.

"Obviously some think it would be great if there was only one group and they may have a point but there is nothing from stopping a third group coming up," he said.

And he added that meetings for both organisations are open to all doctors and nobody checks for their membership status.

The two organisations have been in the news lately because of the dispute with the insurance companies. They also function socially - organising events such as family fun day and in the past provided funding for medical students.