Government wants to axe the centuries old corporations of Hamilton and St. George's and centralise power. Are they anachronisms or does 21st century Bermuda need more devolved power, not less?

Success in last Thursday's Corporation of Hamilton elections must have been bittersweet for the victors with Government's axe hanging over City Hall.

Newly-elected Mayor Charles Gosling and the new team of alderman and councillors could soon find themselves in a long, depressing round of negotiations with the ultimate aim of doing them all out of a job.

The decision to abolish the Corporation of Hamilton, which has a power structure virtually unchanged since 1793, has led to an outcry from the United Bermuda Party and from those enmeshed with city politics.

But how relevant is the Corporation in 2009? Fewer than 500 electors were registered to vote in the recent election to control an organisation with a $20 million-plus budget and 120 employees.

Businesses get a vote but many adults who live within the Corporation boundaries do not.

Hamilton Corporation Secretary Ed Benevides said under the current system there are a maximum of around 800 to 1,000 possible electors.

The Corporation believe the residential vote would be increased from around 200 electors to about 800 voters <\!m> if its proposals for reform had been accepted by Government.

Chief among the recommendations was the idea to allow all residents within the city boundaries, who are already on the electoral roll for national elections, to get the franchise. However, the property vote would remain.

Long since dropped from national elections this might seem like an undemocratic remnant of a by-gone age. Former Hamilton Mayor Sutherland Madeiros believes it makes sense.

He said: "It would be ironic for people who pay for the services not to have any say in how those services are provided."

Currently each Bermuda business within the city limits has one vote. Therefore the Bank of Bermuda has the same voting power as a 'mom and pop' store.

But Mr. Madeiros is clearly disappointed that other democratic reforms have been ignored by Government in favour of outright abolition.

"We requested Government amend the Municipalities Act to open up the franchise significantly.

"Because they have not responded we have not been able to expand the franchise which is something we are now be criticised for <\!m> by Government."

To Mr. Madeiros, City Hall is a nuts and bolts organisation whose efficient functioning has not been fully appreciated by Government.

"All we do is clean the streets, deal with the sewage, ensure the street and traffic lights are working.

"We don't have responsibility for schools, the Police etc. We keep the city clean and working <\!m> nothing more, nothing less."

The city draws no money from Government but instead gets its revenue mainly from taxes, parking fees and wharfage. Domestic residents pay ten percent of their ARV (annual rental value) taxes to the city, businesses pay the full whack.

"So if Government charges $3,000 we charge the same for Corporation tax, in residential units if Government charges $100 we charge $10."

Some might see it as double taxation but Mr. Madeiros argues it is the Government who could be seen as taking money it doesn't need from Hamiltonians, not the city.

"They give very little tax to us, they give much more to Government, which provides very little in the way of services in the city. What are the businesses getting from Government? The only answer is policing. And in a lot of incidences that's not being done adequately."

But not everyone sees the Corporation as a model of efficiency.

Former Progressive Labour Party Environment Minister Arthur Hodgson has long been a proponent of devolved power.

But he said: "The Corporation of Hamilton at least has certainly not encouraged support for their existence as they now stand.

"I am connected with a couple of properties in the city and quite frankly they have treated me most shabbily.

"Over the last couple of years they have behaved like children."

Speaking before the Corporation election he said: "Last week they called me to warn me that if my city taxes were not up to date I wouldn't be able to vote.

"Today they called me to tell me that even though my taxes were up to date I was registered to the wrong property so I would still not be able to vote.

"That kind of silly behaviour in this day and age will certainly provoke changes.

"I hope the changes will be in the direction of greater democracy. I might even be provoked to get involved in city politics."

The decision to abolish Bermuda's only two publicly elected bodies outside Parliament raises huge questions about whether grass roots democracy has any place in a small jurisdiction.

Bermuda has unelected parish councils which are more often than not moribund, occasionally attracting headlines for the wrong reasons, such as for late financial reporting.

Mr. Hodgson is disappointed they have not been revived and strengthened. He said: "From its inception the PLP promoted the idea of greater citizen participation in public affairs.

"We wanted an extension of the franchise for the corporations and for the parish councils.

"Instead of extending the franchise the United Bermuda Party eliminated voting altogether for the parish councils.

"Of course when the PLP came into office I expected that this would be addressed immediately but our enthusiasm seems to have cooled."

But in such small geographical areas such as Hamilton and St. George's why can't electors take decisions for themselves? Do they need several tiers of part-time politicians to mind the shop or could direct democracy be the way forward with plebiscites, perhaps via the internet?

Bermuda is perhaps alone among Overseas Territories in having something like the corporations.

In the British island territory of Guernsey, with a population size virtually identical to Bermuda, below the local Parliament are other tiers of elected representation.

Each of Guernsey's ten parishes are administered by 'douzaines', elected by parishioners. Two elected constables carry out the decisions of the douzaine, serving between one and three years.

And in the Cayman Islands, comparable to Bermuda in so many ways, the newly-approved constitution will create "district councils" <\!m> sort of ad hoc advisory groups.

It's unclear how they will work and whether they will be appointed or elected but the development indicates at least one overseas territory is open to expanding grass roots influence.

And what of Bermuda's landowning quangos?

The West End Development Corporation owns 214 acres comprising 1.6 percent of Bermuda's land mass, employs 31 people and has an annual revenue of nearly $10 million.

Yet there is no direct democratic control <\!m> a board is appointed by government. Similarly with the Bermuda Land Development Corporation (BLDC). This government-owned private sector company was created to bring about the development of the former US military bases, totalling more than 720 acres <\!m> five percent of the Island's land mass. Again there is no democratic grass roots control, central government appoints the board and BLDC remains financially dependent on it, a situation which raised alarm in a Government report in 2004 as the quango can use government cash to compensate for any financial mismanagement.

Indeed Cabinet's Central Policy Unit recommended five years ago that Wedco should combine with BLDC, or that both merge with Bermuda Housing Corporation but little has been heard about this since.

The United Bermuda Party at least is open to the idea of democratically elected quangos <\!m> in some cases.

Leader Kim Swan said: "We would very happily take a look at helping to further develop Dockyard and the BLDC by looking at having elected councils there, but we suspect control issues would mean they would be advisory in nature.

"Dockyard seems to us ready for that sort of development now, although we think the BLDC perhaps needs a little longer to develop the sort of community identity that should be a prerequisite."

He added that the UBP believes in local democracy. "But we don't believe a revival of parish councils is the way to go. Bermuda is now a place so small that all government is local government, in a sense.

"Once upon a time, when available technology and our way of life made this seem a bigger place than now, then perhaps there was a need for assistance of one type or another to be closer to the population, but that is no longer true."

For the moment Government's focus is solely on the corporations in what Mr. Swan alleges is both a land grab and a betrayal.

He said: "As recently as last year's Throne Speech, Government said the Corporations had served Bermuda well, and that it was working with them to update their legal framework.

"We do not believe closing the corporations down is the correct way to go. In the circumstances, negotiations in good faith having been entered into by the corporations, there is an element of betrayal involved

"It is bound to provoke ill-feeling by the good townsfolk of Hamilton and St George's who, far from being further democratised, are to be completely disenfranchised. We believe strongly that Government should finish what it has begun, and give the Corporations a chance at trying out new methods of operation."

Mr. Swan said it was absurd to suggest that the Government could increase efficiency by taking the Corporations. "Government is not known for its swift and efficient maintenance of Bermuda's infrastructure <\!m> the state of Bermuda's roads is a good example.

"The Government generally is having great performance difficulties under the Progressive Labour Party Government. We know that from the Auditor's reports, and from their quite dramatic failure to properly manage building projects <\!m> the Berkeley project being a good example."

But Mr. Swan said the chance of a land grab was too tempting for Government. "The two corporations have large land holdings, worth hundreds of millions of dollars, including virtually the entire waterfront in the two municipal areas.

"Government has run Bermuda into enormous debt <\!m> no doubt they'd like to be able to sell some of that land off to help them balance the books."

Mr. Swan also makes the argument that the corporations are organic to the Bermudian way of life, offering a ceremonial role.

"A Bermuda without, for example, the St. George's Corporation's participation in the Peppercorn Ceremony in St George's, or the Hamilton Corporation's lunchtime ceremonies and art exhibits in Hamilton, will be a very much poorer and less interesting place, not just for tourists, but for Bermudians as well."

Justifying Government's stance recently, Minister without Portfolio Walter Roban said it was "simply impractical and unwieldy in 2009 in such a small jurisdiction to have competing arms of government".

However Mr. Gosling said that despite the recent infighting in the Corporation, it has done a good job in maintaining the city and Government will find it an onerous job to take over its functions successfully, including the six-day week trash pick up.

He recalls the political stink when the UBP stopped twice a week trash collection nationally years ago, a policy successfully reversed when the PLP took over in 1998.

"They say all politics is local, that's a perfect example."

And the abolition plans have not impressed other independent minds across the Island.

Former Corporation of Hamilton common councillor Graeme Outerbridge said: "Rather than destroy local government in Bermuda they should reform this outdated piece of legislation and open up the meetings and the process and include all the 1000 Bermudian resident voters shut out from voting in Hamilton."

And he said democratic reform should not stop there.

"Yes there is a place for parish councils and they too should be elected bodies reporting to the elected government of the day.

"I would also like to see Wedco and the BLDC combined into one entity and also be an elected body in its own right or be combined with the St. George's Corporation.

"I am certain that public bodies that are accountable to voters are bedrock for the democratic process."

And Stuart Hayward of the Voters' Rights Association said: "No one questions that the operations of the corporations need review and revision, but to declare they are to be abolished prior to a comprehensive review is a poorly planned approach.

"We are yet to be convinced that the Bermuda Government can do a better job of managing the corporations' functions."