Michael Dunkley yesterday explained his decision to hold the upcoming Commission of Inquiry behind closed doors.

The Premier, who announced the independent investigation into the handling of taxpayers’ money under the former Progressive Labour Party administration last week, told The Royal Gazette: “Giving evidence is a highly stressful experience for anyone, especially in a public forum.

“In planning this commission, we felt the inquiry’s informational and evidential needs would be best served by holding its meetings in camera.

“If the commission decides to hold public meetings, then it will have licence to do so but we felt the in-camera provision was important for the fulfillment of its work.”

He said it was important to note that the commission’s full report would be made public.

The Commissions of Inquiry Act 1935, which determines how the investigation must be conducted, requires a report in writing to be made the Governor.

Mr Dunkley said last week that four commissioners, including a lawyer and an accountant, would be appointed by mid-January, with a report due in less than four months.

The commission will look at how government money was managed by civil servants for the financial years ending March 31, 2010, 2011 and 2012, after what the Premier described as a recent “disturbing report” by Auditor-General Heather Jacobs Matthews.

Mrs Matthews found that public officials violated the rules on the spending of millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money so often that it became the “norm for which there are no consequences”.

Previous reports from the Auditor also revealed breaches of financial instructions but Mr Dunkley said the commission would be limited to the three years covered by her most recent inquiry because it was the first report tabled while he was Premier and the first since the law was changed to allow the Premier to call for a Commission of Inquiry.

“Once the commission completes its investigation of the three financial years in question, there will be opportunities to decide on further action,” he added.

He disagreed with a claim by Jeremy Deacon in an opinion piece on Bernews this week that he had done a U-turn after stating to the news website in November that investigating the breaches was “not something that a government should do”.

“My position on this matter starts with my responsibility as Premier to uphold the highest standards of accountability across all government departments,” Mr Dunkley told this newspaper.

“At the time, I said I’d been in discussions with the head of the Civil Service on the matter and that I was intending to meet with the Auditor-General about ways to improve the situation.

“I also said I supported an appropriate investigation into the situation. With that in mind and after further discussions with colleagues and the Governor and a continuing review of the Auditor-General’s report, I announced our intention to form a Commission of Inquiry.

“This is to be an investigation independent of government, following terms of reference that we hope will produce recommendations to break the back of bad habits and restore accountability to the centre of government business.

“This is an initiative that has received support from virtually every sphere of Bermuda public life.”

The Premier said there was no estimated cost for the inquiry, as the commission was still being put together.

“The final cost of the inquiry will be determined by the amount of time it takes and the resources needed to gather information,” he said. “Our aim is to see a report produced three months after the appointment of a commission but we’ve said we are prepared to extend the time needed in order for the commission to fulfil its terms of reference.

“While cost is a factor in taking this initiative, particularly at a time of extremely tight budgets, the Government decided an inquiry was in order for the very compelling reasons we outlined in our December 29 announcement.

“These reasons include serious problems of budget accountability and control that perpetuated inefficiencies and ineffectiveness across government and the failure to obey financial instructions.”

Asked for the cost of previous commissions, a Ministry of Finance spokesman said the information was not readily available.