Alex Scott has a simple message for politicians and civil servants who don't support the introduction of public access to information (PATI) legislation in Bermuda: "The Government serves the public, serves the people. Access to information, especially in this day and age, is fundamental to good governance. It is their information, not our information."

The former Premier was prepared to put his money where his mouth was when he was in charge of the country, making a firm promise to introduce PATI legislation in the first Throne Speech under his leadership in 2003.

By the time he left office in late 2006, Government's Central Policy Unit (CPU) had produced a discussion paper on the topic and held a public consultation. But the legislation was not yet drafted — a situation which remains the same today.

Now a Government backbencher with a wealth of experience in both the House of Assembly and the Senate, Mr. Scott's passion for PATI has not lessened. He is backing The Royal Gazette's call for legislation to be tabled at the earliest opportunity if it is what the public wants.

"It is my hope — and this is the reason why I'm happy to cooperate and do this interview — that we can bring the community's focus back on the concept of freedom of access to information," he says.

"I certainly support the notion of continuing the process. It is not my intention to criticise government for whatever it has done or hasn't done since we tabled the PATI green paper in 2005."

The Progressive Labour Party stalwart adds: "It's about accountability. We saw it as a part of institutionalising change here in Bermuda; not being satisfied with the success that we have had as a country but, as the Premier has said, taking Bermuda to the next level. This would certainly be part and parcel of doing that. It should not be feared. It should be encouraged."

Mr. Scott supports the principle of maximum disclosure and is keen to stress the importance of everybody having the ability to obtain information as opposed to an elite few.

He worked closely with the civil servants who wrote the discussion paper and says any legislation would include exemptions to prevent certain kinds of data, such as personal details or security information, being made public.

"At no time did I feel: 'Oh dear, I think we have gone a bridge too far because we are opening Pandora's box'," he says.

"Only in specific cases should the public be denied information. Or to flip the coin, the public should have access to most of the information in government records, files, reports and so forth."

He knows there will be resistance from some but urges cabinet ministers and civil servants not to instinctively recoil from the idea. "When you discuss the concept of freedom of information that's sometimes the response: 'oh, it's going to be a problem, folks are going to use that information against us'," he says, adding that his answer to that would be: "You actually are only the keepers of these reports for those who would want it."

He describes his formula for a more democratic Bermuda as "putting in place building blocks such as sustainable development, PATI, the ombudsman and, yes, Independence.

"All of these things taken as a collective, in my view and our view when we were in office, provided a fundamental basis for this country to move forward, change and be competitive economically. If it is done right it just becomes another feather in Bermuda's cap."

He sees capturing the public's imagination and convincing Government of its benefits as the key to getting PATI brought in. "If you are not familiar with how it works it may put off some members of Government. But while many countries have not done it, at least 50 have. I think the countries that have are richer for it; their democracies are stronger."

Mr. Scott says Government could "easily pick up" where it left off with PATI. "It would take time, it would take resources, it would take a staff. But the technology allows us to manage and recall information. We have search engines now that could facilitate that.

"We had some excellent young folk in the CPU. Under the direction of Warren Jones they provided us with an excellent frame of reference. We have done a lot of the basic work."

He admits he doesn't know Premier Dr. Ewart Brown's plans for PATI but says he understands that the Premier has had his own priorities since entering office.

"I don't know whether it's a yea or no as to whether government will be moving on this green paper," he says. "I hope so. I think it's fundamental to good governance."

The part he can play now he is no longer Premier, he says, is in making Bermudians aware of how PATI could benefit them, taking the idea back to the PLP's parliamentary caucus and — potentially, if the people are behind it — tabling a bill himself in parliament.

"It may sound to those in Government as if it's a tool that someone can use to subvert the Government's plans, programmes and position. In actual fact that hasn't proven to be the case elsewhere. It actually works the other way. It actually opens up a relationship and there becomes a bond of trust between both."

Mr. Scott is now waiting to see how Bermuda — and his Government — responds to the call for action on PATI and a more open administration.

He knows he may be criticised for speaking out on the subject but is unrepentant. "Cut me and I bleed green," he says of his commitment to the PLP. "I don't intend to the party an injury but we (senior politicians) do have experience. I will not hesitate to speak publicly about those issues that I think are important to the public.

"Just putting this forward legislatively through the parliamentary steps says volumes about the government's commitment to democracy. The trust factor would go up considerably between the community and government. It would be a win-win."

He is positive that Government will do the right thing and hopes this year's Throne Speech on February 1 will reflect that.

"Government will be very quick to respond if there is a clear indication that this is something that the public and the community feel should be part of the Government's platform," he says.

Having talked eloquently about PATI for well over an hour, the former public relations consultant allows himself a chuckle. "It would be a good PR move," he concludes, with a grin. "Not that that should be the rationale."