What is in a word, Mr. Editor? Apparently a lot. Take the word reform for instance. It seems to have taken on a whole new meaning as it applies to Government's plans for the municipalities of Hamilton and St. George's.

There are some among us (maybe many) who do not see it as a reform at all, but rather the means to do away with the municipalities altogether under cover of $800,000 consultants.

But maybe we shouldn't be too surprised. This has been on the cards for some time and people who thought otherwise were probably fooling themselves.

Let's back up a bit and return to what the current Minister responsible, Walter Roban, had to say when he first announced this proposed, um, review (my word, for now). Incidentally, this wasn't long after he was appointed to Cabinet, as I recall, as Minister Without Portfolio, when we on the other side thought he had been brought in to do the job.

But he insists – and was quoted as recent as last week — that Government has "no preconceived notions". Excuse me, but I disagree. There were a sufficient number of preconceived notions right from the outset.

There's no better evidence of this than the Minister's own written statement of June 26, 2009 which now forms part of the irrefutable record of the House on the Hill. These statements are worth saving for just such purposes.

First, Minister Roban reminded us that Government had promised in the February 2008 Throne Speech to undertake reform of municipal government in Bermuda with "a thorough examination" of the Municipalities Act 1923. He has this week repeated the claim. But if you check the reference, what he is saying is, well, a bit of a stretch.

Here's what you will actually find in that Throne Speech: "The Corporation of Hamilton and St. George's have served their respective municipalities well, but the framework within which they operate is outdated and it can be argued that it does not reflect modern governance. Accordingly, amendments to the Municipalities Act 1923 will be considered to modernise the Corporation, and to better serve the people of our past and present capitals."

Gee, that sounds like a far cry from where we are today; in fact it sounds a lot like the work which the Corporation of Hamilton has already undertaken, like updating the Act, including widening the franchise, which they have shared with Government – and for free.

The fact is we never saw any amendments from Government. There was no discussion or debate in the House either. Instead, what the Minister told us in his statement was that a small group of people had been working on the issue behind closed doors. He disclosed that this group comprised "the Cabinet Office, a small Committee of Cabinet, the Honourable Member for Constituency One (Dame Jennifer Smith, we presumed) and the Central Policy Unit".

In his words, not mine, Minister Roban went on to say: "An exhaustive review of present issues, methods adopted in other jurisdictions and consideration of the way forward has already taken place."

In other words, mine, not his, it was pretty well a done deal – by then back then.

Again, in his words, not mine, from the statement: "Mr. Speaker, the considered view of these groups and as approved by Cabinet is that the Municipalities Act 1923 should be repealed and the operations of the Municipalities be transitioned into the relevant Government Departments."

There you have it – though there was even more. The Minister explained that repeal of the Act would only be "the first stage of the transition", and that while the creation of "a Municipalities Secretariat" was considered to oversee the process, Cabinet opted instead to go the route of consultants to do the job on the two corporations.

What job? Again, his words: "for the oversight, management and implementation of the integration of the municipalities of Bermuda into the Government of Bermuda within one year."

It couldn't be clearer. Reform + review = transition = integration + elimination. It's the new political math of Minister Roban and the PLP Government: well, OK, maybe not so new.

You will recall that the stated goal was to bring about modern governance. The irony is that the process which has been employed to date is anything but: hardly participatory, and hardly open, to this point, but transparent, definitely. Meanwhile, the Minister wouldn't (couldn't) even assure us that the report of the consultants would be made public – and it's costing us, the taxpayers, $800,000.

Their objectives were also pretty clear from the June, 2009 Ministerial Statement.

"These reforms are necessary," declared Minister Roban. "It is simply impractical and unwieldy in 2009 in such a small jurisdiction to have competing arms of government. Electoral reform has not been effected in a manner that gives comfort to those of us who value the franchise. Fiscal prudence demands that we eliminate potential double taxation, duplication of services, unwitting subsidies and the like, all of which do not make best use of the public purse."

That's pretty rich: $800,000.00 on consultants – two months after civil servants were instructed to implement "austere costs savings" which was to include a freeze on hiring new consultants. I suppose next we will be hearing about is a far-flung whirlwind jaunt to, say, where? India you think?

But hey, the real prize at stake here hasn't been lost on the Mayor of Hamilton: 32 properties and $500 million in assets. This could mean a lot to a Government that is taking us deeper and deeper into debt, the $800,000 notwithstanding.

Reforms?!

I don't know, but if it seems to me that if it walks like a duck and swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, it must be a ___________. [ How about we let the readers take over here, Mr. Editor, and fill in the blank?]

Comments? Questions? Answers?! –Write jbarritt@ibl.bm