about the proposed amendments to our Constitution, it is perhaps worth noting how the British Government and other democracies are going about their programme of constitutional reform. A primary duty of an electoral system is to represent the wishes of the voters as effectively as possible. A very important aspect of the British Government's constitutional reform is to look at the fairness of their voting system.

The British Government in December 1997, appointed an Independent Commission to consider an alternative to the current electoral system, "first past the post'' with a remit to report within 12 months, with the following terms of reference: The commission shall be free to consider and recommend any appropriate system or combination of systems in recommending an alternative to the present system for Parliamentary elections to be put before the people in the Government's referendum.

The Commission shall observe the requirement for broad proportionality, the need for stable Government, an extension of voter choice and the maintenance of a link between MP's and geographical constituencies.

The Commission reported in October 1998 and recommended a two-vote mixed system which is a form of proportional representation.

What is significant is that the British Government has given the British electorate an undertaking that the recomme ndations of the Commission will be put before the British people in a referendum before any constitutional changes are made.

The Lord Chancellor, Lord Irving of Lairg said, and I quote: "The wider use of referendums in the United Kingdom marks our insistences that people have a determinative say in major constitutional change.'' W hat our Government has proposed are major constitutional changes. Surely the British Government would not want anything less for Bermudians than the British people.

There is law and/or custom and practice by many democratic countries to put constitutional changes directly to the people by way of referendums.

Referendums are used in European and Scandinavian countries frequently. It is very much a feature of their administrative and legal process. It has also become increasingly used in the Commonwealth. Britain conducted a referendum to decide whether or not they should go in the European Union. Canada used a referendum to establish whether or not Quebec wanted to secede from Canada.

Recently Australia conducted a referendum on whether or not they should remain a Monarchy or become a Republic. The Barbados Prime Minister has also recently announced that his Government intends to have a referendum to decide whether Barbados should move from a Monarchy to a Republic. The majority of Commonwealth independent countries in the Caribbean have a procedure enshrined in their Constitutions for making changes to their Constitutions. This procedure includes two-thirds majority in the lower house of any bill proposing change, followed by a majority vote by referendum.

Our Government would be right in step with most of the progressive democratic governments in the world if they would see their way clear to have a constitutional conference followed by a referendum. This in the final analysis would be the only way that all Bermudians would feel that they have the opportunity to influence very important decisions that affect their lives and the lives of future generations.

Bermuda had 36 members of the House of Assembly from the 1680's until 1968 when our first written Constitution came into effect. Under the 1968 Constitution this number was increased to 40. No persuasive arguments have been advanced that the downsizing of Parliament will enrich or improve democracy. Quite the contrary, the reduction of members on the backbench and the opposition is likely to erode democracy.

A strong backbench together with a strong opposition are crucial safe grounds for any democracy.

Benjamin Disraeli, a former British Prime Minister said: "No government can long be secure without formidable opposition.'' Former US Chief Justice Brandies said, "Like the course of the heavenly bodies, harmony in national affairs is a resultant of the struggle between contending forces.'' An African Statesman said, "Don't be afraid of opposition, remember a kite flies against, not with the wind.'' The above quotations illustrate rather succinctly that for democracy to work at its best you need a viable backbench and a formidable opposition.

Honest, strong, transparent and accountable democratic governments are far more likely to exist when there is a strong opposition.

As I understand it, some of the constitutional changes have risen out of the Civil Service Review. This review is obviously a working document that the Premier refers to but has not been made public. Confidence in Government has been unnecessarily undermined by this culture of secrecy. Excessive secrecy reflects an arrogance of power and a lack of accountability.

Progressive Governments, like USA and Canada, have Freedom of Information Acts. The British Government is also intending to enact a Freedom of Information Act during the life of this Parliament. The Lord Chancellor said: "The Act will mesh a watershed in the relationship between the Government and the people of the United Kingdom. The British people will, at best, have the right to know what is being said and done in their name; and they will be better equipped to be active participants in political discourse on the future of their country.'' It might have been difficult for the Bermuda Government to bring in a Freedom of Information Act before the UK did because Bermuda is bound by the UK Official Secrets Act. The UK Freedom of Information Act is now in the House of Lords. When the Act becomes law, it could serve as a model for a Bermuda Act tailored, of course, to our specific needs and circumstances.

A Freedom of Information Act would turn the Government's pledge of accountability, transparency and scrutiny in the sunshine of public opinion from mere words into stark reality.

The Government has promised to be truly of the people, for the people and by the people. They have committed to be an all-inclusive Government. As the Government embarks on this programme of constitutional change, they should consult widely to involve as many different groups and individuals in the process and to encourage public debate and give the Bermudian people a direct say by way of a referendum. It is of tremendous benefit to Government if they approach this constitutional revision without haste and rancour but unity and peace.