The United Bermuda Party is stressing the need to push through Public Access To Information (PATI) legislation as soon as possible, as opposed to waiting until 2011.

Following recent private and public meetings, the Central Policy Unit will spend the next few months developing legislation which will be forwarded to Cabinet early next year and tabled by the Autumn of 2006.

Implementation is due to commence sometime between 2007 and 2009 with access beginning in either 2010 or 2011.

But Opposition House Leader and local attorney John Barritt said this week that he was not going to ?hold his breath?.

Mr. Barritt said what is needed more than PATI is legislation which encourages civil servants to blow the whistle on corruption and wrongdoing ? a Whistleblowers Act.

?The UBP has always campaigned for transparency and accountability,? he said.

?We have a terrible time getting information from a Government that has a record for not being forthcoming and open.?

Mr. Barritt said what is needed is not just the ?will, but evidence of the will?.

?Legislation that only comes into effect in 2011? Give me a break,? he added.

His sentiment was echoed by the Shadow Attorney General Trevor Moniz who is calling for bipartisan discussions.

Mr. Moniz said unlike the Bermuda Independence Commission report, in which the UBP did not want to participate, the PATI legislation is something the UBP wants to have a say in.

He agreed with Mr. Barritt on the need for a Whistleblowers Act of some kind and used the Bermuda Housing Corporation debacle as an example.

?Nobody ever gets to the bottom of these things and if someone in Alex Scott?s house committed a crime, would he get rid of them? I think not,? he said.

Mr. Moniz said when it came down to sleazy activities involving Government officials, the Premier had always been very ?glib? about it.

?We haven?t seen ministers resigning on points of principle, or being dismissed on points of principle, as should be the case with the Bermuda Housing Corporation debacle,? he said.

Mr. Moniz added that despite allegations of ministerial involvement in steering pension funds, there was still no investigation.

As for PATI, Mr. Moniz said the UBP would like to see some kind of draft legislation sooner than later.

?While I think everyone approves in principle to the legislation, the subject might be too complex for the average man on the street to understand,? he said.

He added that the Central Policy Unit, tasked with the PATI legislation, needs to discuss the issue in a meaningful fashion.

?You can?t expect the public to attend a meeting and have a meaningful discussion on a topic very few people even understand,? he said.

Mr. Moniz said PATI would require change not just amongst politicians, but also civil servants.

?It?s happened in the past where you get this response from civil servants that they refuse to do something unless you point out in the legislation where it states that they have to do it,? he said.

Assistant Cabinet Secretary of Policy Warren Jones confirmed this week that there is no draft legislation ready.

What is drafted is the discussion paper which the Premier is set to table in the House during the next session.

Mr. Jones said over the course of the next year drafting of the legislation would take place.

?The steps from here are important because the Premier tabled the discussion paper in July with the intent of opening up discussion and for input collection from private and public meetings,? he said.

This input, he said, would be taken to the House during the next session for future discussion on the floor of the House when the Opposition would also be given the opportunity to give input.

Mr. Jones said despite an invitation by the Premier to the UBP, no opposition members attended meetings, including the public meeting a week ago, and no e-mails or telephone calls concerning the initiative have been received from anyone in the UBP.

In his 2004 Annual Report, the Auditor General expressed his concern at the number of apparent or alleged frauds and misappropriations that have come to light in recent years in Government entities.

Quoting from his report, the Auditor General said: ?I worry lest it indicates a growing culture of opportunism or dishonesty by some in the public service.?

Larry Dennis went on to support a whistleblowers legislation and said: ?Public servants will not report the wrongdoings of their colleagues unless they know they will be protected.?

Mr. Dennis said: ?In this regard, the Premier stated in August 2004 that his Government is prepared to place questionable activities under the heaviest scrutiny and is prepared to live with the outcome.?

In the same report, the Ministry of Finance responded to the suggested whistleblowers legislation by saying: ?The recently passed Ombudsman Act 2004 provides for redress for ?whistleblowers? through the Human Rights Act. This provision was in recognition that persons who complain should feel free to complain without suffering discrimination of any kind.?

The Ministry of Finance added that an independent Whistleblowers Act was being discussed during the development of the Ombudsman Act, but at that stage there had not been a decision taken whether or not to proceed.

During the next session in the House, the UBP plan to table draft legislation as part of motion supporting future whistleblowers legislation.

This draft legislation is based on the Canadian Bill C-25 which establishes a procedure for the disclosure of wrongdoings in the public sector, including the protection of persons who disclose the wrongdoings.