A bill giving the Chief Statistician powers to conduct compulsory surveys passed in the Senate yesterday but the United Bermuda Party (UBP) warned that it could lead to serious privacy issues in the future.

Opposition Senators agreed with the law's purpose - to improve Government decision making by making sure that accurate data can be collected.

It protects confidentiality of individual information by imposing strict penalties - including fines and a spell in prison - for Statistics Department employees who violate confidentiality.

And the new law makes it compulsory for businesses, community groups and individuals to provide information requested by the Department and removes barriers that prevent Government Departments from sharing statistics with each other.

Up to $5,000 in fines could be levied against people who fail to provide required information or who provide false information.

In the past voluntary surveys have led to a low response rate.

Sen. Neville Darrell (UBP), in his maiden Senate speech, said the law was heavy handed and made it possible for Government to violate individuals' right to privacy.

He likened it to a banana split without the banana.

He argued that unlike other jurisdictions, Bermuda has no separate legislation protecting individual privacy, nor does the Island have a data protection Act which protects confidentiality.

The right to be left alone is enshrined in international human rights law and Canada, Ireland, Australia and the UK all have legislation and institutions designed to prevent violations, he said.

Individuals must have the right to access information collected about them, if only to ensure accuracy, he continued.

Businesses are not required under the bill to disclose trade secrets and the Department must get written consent to release individual information.

The overall objective, explained Government Senators, is to have a more integrated approach to the collection of statistics, and improve the integrity of data collected to allow Government to make better quality decisions.

The bill requires the population Census to take place every five years - instead of every ten - starting in 2010 and will be the governing act for the Statistics Department.

The UBP also expressed concerns about what happens to the data once collected.

Government Senate Leader David Burch said the law enshrined within it the right to confidentiality, protected individual information, was long overdue and soundly crafted.

"There is very little that can be said to assail this initiative," Government Sen. Michael Scott said.

"When one considers how it (data) is compiled it is not possible to individualise or single out people," added Sen. Victoria Pearman (PLP).

Regarding data protection legislation in other countries, she asked: "My question is what protections and provisions are contained in this legislation which the Statistics Act does not provide?"

At the committee stage, the Opposition sought to make changes which would limit the power of the Minister with responsibility for the Statistics Department to direct the Chief Statistician to collect statistics from the population.

Sen. Burch said it was "standard legalese" in the Country's laws that the Minister with overall responsibility have powers to direct the head of the Department.

"Obviously, their PR (public relations) consultant has told them to demonise every Minister of Government," he said.

Sen. Kim Swan (UBP) denied he was attempting to demonise the Government but attempting to improve the bill to "protect the integrity of the Ministers" and "minimise micromanagement".

But Sen Swan later characterised the Government as one of "oppression, repression fear-mongering, `at your peril' and `we don't care what you think'."

The Opposition also wanted Parliamentary scrutiny over the Minister's decision to amend the list of types of surveys covered under the law.

That, too, was put to a vote and defeated - as was another amendment which sought to include a requirement that the Government publish the manpower survey results annually.

In the end there were no objections to the bill being passed as proposed.

Sen. Darrell told The Royal Gazette later that there were enough protections in Bermuda's laws to prevent Government from intruding into the private lives of individuals.

But he said "in terms of individual stakeholders and organisations, not enough care has been taken to protect privacy rights down the road. The privacy issue will clearly play itself out as this act operates throughout society."

Asked to define privacy, he said it concerned the right for individuals to access their own information to ensure that its accurate and for other purposes.

He repeated a concern, made during the debate, that the law does not enshrine the right to access to statistical information, despite Sen. Burch's assurance that the Statistics Department routinely provide information to researchers and students who request it.

Government should have formalised the practice, he said.

And he added that the law "speaks well" in terms of protecting confidentiality" and requiring written consent for the release of individual information.