December 11, 2024

Thank you, Madam President.
I just wanted to commend the Government on
bringing this study forward. It is obviously of very high importance for us on our little Island. And I would urge
as many of those as possible to whom it pertains to
study it and read it. And I am sure all of th e relevant
professionals will be taking it on. It seems like we have a lot of work to do to protect ourselves going forward.
Thank you, Madam President, and thank you,
Senator, for the Statement.
The President: Thank you, Senator De Couto.
That leads us then to the second Statement on
the Annual Report of the Department of Financial As-sistance.
Would any Senator care to ask questions on
this Statement?
Senator Tucker, OBA Leader in the Senate,
you have the floor.
Sen. Robin Tucker: Thank you, Madam President.
So, I actually have three questions. May I just
go ahead and ask all three at the same time? The President: Yes.

QUESTION 1: DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE 2023/24 ANNUAL REPORT
Sen. Robin Tucker: Okay. My first question is, just
looking back at the 2022/23 report, which shared that
there were $328,000 in overpayments due to fraud and abuse, I am just curious to know how much of that debt
has been recovered to date? That is the first question.

QUESTION 2: DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE 2023/24 ANNUAL REPORT
Sen. Robin Tucker: The second question is, again
comparing the details in the report to the 2022/23 re-port, which showed that there were . . . Sorry. The current report, point number 7 on page 2 indicates that currently there are 39 active cases that are undergoing . . .
I beg your pardon. Number 7 reads, an increase in the
outstanding debt due to overpayment because of a rigorous investigation regime, currently there are 39 active cases of which 31 have been referred to the Attorney General’s Chambers.
Again, my question is, when comparing to the
2022/23 report, it showed that there were 26 cases with
the Attorney General’s Chambers for legal restitution.
So, I just wanted to know, What measures are being
put in place to reduce the amount of overpayment?

QUESTION 3: DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE 2023/24 ANNUAL REPORT

Sen. Robin Tucker: Then my third question is again
from page 2, looking at the breakdown, the average
number of recipients of Finance Assistance. I noted
that while most numbers did go down, pensioners went
up by 8 persons. So, I just wanted to know if I could get
some information about how many new Financial As-sistance applicants have been submitted since the last
reporting period? Because that would give us some information about what those trends might be, particularly fo r that group.
Thank you, Madam President.
The President: Thank you, Senator Tucker.
Would any other Senator care to ask questions?
Senator Dwayne Robinson, you have the floor.

QUESTION 1: DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE 2023/24 ANNUAL REPORT
Sen. Dwayne Robinson: Thank you, Madam President.
Just one quick question. Regarding on page 2,
there is a 5 per cent decrease in the numbers of persons. I just wanted to ask how that number correlates
with any potential emigration numbers and whether or
78 11 December 202 4 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda Senate not that is due to fewer people requiring financial assistance or whether it is just fewer people on Island who
have gone overseas to the UK or wherever to receive
benefits or pursue a different course of survival?

The President: Thank you, Senator Dwayne Robinson.
Vice President Kiernan Bell, you have the floor.

QUESTION 1: DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE 2023/24 ANNUAL REPORT

Sen. Kiernan Bell: Thank you, Madam President.
I did have a number of questions. Some flow -
on from the questions of others but are a little bit more
detailed.
When I saw that the number of recipients of Financial Assistance decreased (and this is on page 2 of
the report) to 1,991 from the average of 2,095 recorded the year prior, I went and looked at the substance of the
data and the actual report which was lodged to see if there was any clarity there. And the graph, graph 8 (I
believe) in the report shows that the number of applications, pre- screened applications (and it seems to have
been done on a combined basis of Financial Assistance and for the child care support) have increased
over the year).
I wondered if it would be possible to provide an
actual breakdown of the number of applications by reference to those two categories instead of lumping them
both together. It is very difficult to see how many actual applications for Financial Assistance w ere made. So
that is number one.

QUESTION 2: DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE 2023/24 ANNUAL REPORT
Sen. Kiernan Bell: Number two, the report refers to a
pre-screening of these applications. And I do not understand what that means. Is pre- screening looking at
an application before it is lodged? Is it an actually fully completed application? Is “pre- screening” a word
meani ng some sort of preliminary approval process? I
just do not know what “pre- screening” means. And that
is referred to in the report. So, can some clarity be given
on that?
Secondly, of those number of applications or
pre-screened applications which were made, how
many were rejected? That would be useful to know.

QUESTION 3: DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE 2023/24 ANNUAL REPORT

Sen. Kiernan Bell: Then finally, to the extent that there
are any data on people who have come off of Financial Assistance, is that because they have become gainfully employed? There was some indication given in the
Statement that there was a decrease in able- bodied
people who were able to get back into the workforce. It would be great to have a little bit more granular data on that. And how many other people perhaps emigrated or
went elsewhere and are still needing financial assistance but just not getting it here?
So that is the substance of the questions on the
applications. With your permission, I did have a number
of other questions in a different part of the report, if I
may, which go to the complaint issue. Part of the objectives of the Department of Financial Assistance is to, of course, reduce the number of complaints which are
made. And the reference is made to legitimate complaints. The reference was made in the Statement by
the Junior Minister to the fact that the number of complaints has reduced. But there are no data in the actual
report of year -on-year what number of complaints have
been made so that one can actually measure how much those complaints have reduced by. So how many actual complaints were made against the Department
of Financial Assistance officers to the Ombudsman or
elsewhere that would be considered legitimate complaints? That is that question.
And then my final question concerned a reference to the fraud side, to one of the investigations being
referred to the Attorney General’s Chambers with a
concern about micro- structuring. And micro- structuring, for the listening audience, as I understand i t, is a
form of money laundering where you reduce the amount, say, from $10,000 to smaller amounts to get
under the profile of suspicious cash transactions with
banking and other financial institutions.
I am puzzled as to how the Department of Financial Assistance funding has been able to be used or
potentially may have been able to be used for micro-structuring. So, I would be grateful to have an answer
to that question as well.
Thank you.
The President: Thank you, Vice President Kiernan
Bell.
Would any other Senator care to ask questions
on this Statement?
Hearing none, then we will await a response
from Senator Simmons.

Sen. Lindsay Simmons: Thank you, Madam President.
Madam President, I have noted 10 questions I
was asked today. I have written them down. Most of these questions I am going to have to get the answers because they are asking for specific numbers that I do
not have in front of me. So, what I think is best is if I
take all of the questions and get the answers. And I will
give the answers next Wednesday as well with the correct numbers.
Thank you, Madam President.

The President: With that response, then, Senators,
Senator Simmons has agreed to provide these


Bermuda Senate answers, but not at this time. And she does not have a
technical officer here to provide the responses.
Vice President Kiernan Bell.

Sen. Kiernan Bell: Thank you, Madam President.
And appreciating that that is the position that
has been taken, I wonder then if I could anticipate a
follow -up question. So perhaps I can get an answer to
that question as well.
One of the amendments which was made to
the Financial Assistance Act in the last legislative session essentially created the risk of prosecution and jail
time for people who applied for Financial Assistance.
And of course, this body has heard me refer to a concern about the criminalisation of poverty as a result of that.
So, I would actually like to know whether there
was any decrease in the number of applications for Financial Assistance following that legislative change.
Thank you.

The President: Thank you, Vice President Kiernan
Bell.
Sen. Lindsay Simmons: Thank you, Madam President.
I would also say if it is questions that they want
to ask, they can also email those and I will get the an-swers as well, any other questions.
The President: Senator Tucker.

Sen. Robin Tucker: Yes, Madam President. Thank
you.
Again, appreciating Senator Simmons’s position, I just want to know if, when she gets her responses, she can give them orally and we be given leave to be able to ask supplemental questions once
she gives those answers next week?
Thank you, Madam President.

Sen. Lindsay Simmons: Thank you, Madam President.
Madam President, I will definitely give oral answers to the questions. And I will also get a technical
officer to come and answer. Any question obviously, if
it [involves] finding different numbers that they may not
have readily available, I will also get the answers. But
yes.
Thank you, Madam President.

The President: Thank you for that suggestion because
it was one that I was considering to ask you to do so for
next week.
With that said, Senators, we have completed
the questions on the Statements that have been given. We will now move on.
ORDERS OF THE DAY

The President: The [first] Order of the Day is the second reading of the Public Access to Information
Amendment Act 2024. And that is in the name of Senator Fubler, the Junior Minister for the Cabinet Office.

ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT

SENATE VISITOR
The President: And before you begin, I would just like
to acknowledge the presence of the Permanent Secretary, Ms. Aideen Ratteray Pryse, who is in the Chamber
this morning, from the Ministry of Economy and Labour.

The President: Senator Fubler, when you are ready,
you can proceed.

Sen. Mischa Fubler: Madam President, I move that
the Bill entitled the Public Access to Information Amendment Act 2024 be now read a second time.

The President: Is there any objection to that motion?
No objection.

BILL

SECOND READING

PUBLIC ACCESS TO INFORMATION
AMENDMENT ACT 2024

Sen. Mischa Fubler: Madam President, the Public Access to Information Amendment Act 2024 provides
amendments to the Public Access to Information Act 2010, known as PATI, and the Public Access to Information Regulations 2014, known as PATI Regulations,
by implementing appropriate limits on the time spent by
public authorities responding to requests, providing for
the payment of charges in respect of certain requests,
providing an exception for the records relating to the Legal Aid Office and making minor procedural and consequential amendments.
Madam President , public access to information, or freedom of information as it is known in a number of other jurisdictions, provides important rights
of access to information held by governments. PATI
gives the public the right to request access to records
and information held by public authorities. Around the
world, governments have embraced the principles of
transparency and accountability that underpin PATI.
Madam President , PATI is part of a robust information rights framework for Bermuda. In essence, the Government has established a framework that creates transparency and accountability with respect to information held by public authorities and provides rights
of access fo r government -held records. In addition,
80 11 December 202 4 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda Senate PATI helps people to know about government activities
and encourages more information to be placed in the
public domain as a matter of course.
Madam President , over the past nine years,
there have been more than 1,200 PATI requests. Last year in 2023, a total of 49 out of 190 (or 26 per cent) of
public authorities received 189 PATI requests. Several
public authorities, about 20 [per cent] to 26 per cent,
frequently receive more than their share of PATI re-quests in a ny given year. This can place an onus on
these authorities in addition to their regular business
functions.
Madam President , over the past nine years
that PATI has been in force, public authorities have raised a number of issues. Many of these challenges
relate to the management of voluminous and sometimes complex requests, given limited resources. The most frequently expressed concern by public officers
involved in responding to PATI requests is the unreasonable burden on stretched resources and the ability
to balance regular business duties with responding to PATI requests. They have found that responding to
PATI requests req uires significant time and effort to first
conduct an appropriate search and then produce those
records in response to the request.
Some requesters often make very broad- ranging and ill -defined requests for any and all correspondence regarding an issue over extended time periods,
often years. Without [there being] a willingness to refine
the search criteria, these requests often result in hun-dreds , sometimes thousands of pages of records that
information officers must meticulously review. These
requests have often exhausted the public authorities’
resources and detracted from their day -to-day business
functions.
Next, Madam President , the implementation of
the appropriate limit in the PATI Act and regulations will help to alleviate this burden on public authorities in responding to extensive PATI requests, provide a more reasonable approach to processing responsive records
and require requesters to focus or narrow their request
to the exact records they need.
Madam President , the PATI Amendment Act
2024 inserts limits on the time spent by public authori-ties in responding to requests and provides for the payment of charges in respect of requests that exceed the
appropriate limit. Madam President , this appropriate
limit is set at 16 hours for public authorities to process
and respond to PATI requests.
If a public authority estimates that it will take 16
hours or less to process a request, then they will go ahead and do so. If it is estimated that a request will
take longer than 16 working hours to process, the authority can either ask the requester to narrow their request or they can invite the requester to pay a fee for
the extra hours required to fulfil that request. The
choice will depend on the capacity of the public authority to process a request in excess of 16 hours. At this time, a flat rate of $60 per hour is included for those hours of processing and responding
that are above and beyond the appropriate limit of 16
hours. An upper limit of 100 hours is also included in
the legislation. If processing and responding to a re-quest should take more than 100 hour s, the request will
be denied.
Madam President , even with these changes,
Bermudians and residents will continue to be able to
request access to government records. The requests
must now be refined and targeted to the records re-quired. This will enable more efficient responses to the
requests from the public.
Granting access to the records will continue to
follow the existing legislation, providing that one of the
following does not apply : In section 4, the Act does not
apply to the functional records of the named public authority ; or at section 16 there is a refusal of the request
on administrative grounds ; or an exemption applies to
the information or record in whole or in part, which is Part 4 of the Act.
Madam President , a number of jurisdictions
around the world such as the UK, Ireland and Australia
use fees to cover a component of the cost for the actions and functions required to respond to PATI, or freedom of information requests, along with charges for
production costs —as an example, photocopying or
scanning records, which are already provided for under
PATI.

Exception to the Functional Records
of the Legal Aid Office

Sen. Mischa Fubler: Madam President , [clause 3 of]
the PATI Amendment Act 2024 includes the addition of
the Legal Aid Office in section 4 application of the principal PATI Act. In this case, the Act will not apply to
records created or obtained in the course of carrying
out the functions of the Legal Aid Office. This is to protect the provision of legal advice and representations
made by both in- house a nd external counsel, which
contain extremely sensitive and personal information.
The Act will still apply to records of general administration of the Legal Aid Office. This aligns the application of PATI to the Legal Aid Office with the appli-cation to the Department of Public Prosecutions [ DPP]
and the Attorney General’s Chambers.

Minor Procedural
and Consequential Amendments

Sen. Mischa Fubler: Madam President , since implementation in 20 15, it has become clear that the PATI
Act and Regulations require revisions and alignment in
a number of areas. Changes include ensuring consistency of language, changes to the transfer process
to engage the desire of the requester along with a better explanation of the third- party process where records
contain information relating to a person other than the


Bermuda Senate requester. The minor procedural and consequential
amendments proposed streamlining components of the
Act and Regulations that required clarity and alignment
for better cohesion and implementation by information
officers. There are several other updates as well, such
as
• clarifying and reassigning certain responsibilities of the head of the public authority;
• providing clarity of the third -party process and
timelines;
• establishing timelines for Information Commis-sioner reviews, including provisions for a vacancy of the Information Commissioner in line
with the Personal Information Protection Act
2016; and
• allowing the Information Commissioner to delegate powers to staff also in line with the Personal Information Protection Act 2016.
Madam President , the PATI/PIPA Unit has had
extensive consultation with and agreement from the Information Commissioner on the minor, procedural and consequential amendments. The Unit has also worked with and sought input from the Commissioner on the
application of the appropriate limit.
Madam President , if passed by the Legislature,
specific sections of the PATI A mendment Act will come
into effect on the 1
st of January 2025. These sections
include
• section 1, the citation and interpretation of
the principal Act and principal Regulations;
• section 3, addition of the Legal Aid Office to the list of public authorities to which the
Act does not apply to functional records;
• section 10, provisions for a vacancy of the
Information Commissioner;
• section 11, allowing the Information Com-missioner to delegate powers;
• section 16, provisions of dates for com-mencement along with the ability of the
Minister to make transitional provisions by
Regulations through the negative resolution procedure;
• paragraph (1)(a) of the Schedule defining
the Minister to whom responsibilities under
the Act are assigned;
• section 15 so far as it relates to this paragraph;
• paragraph 11 of the Schedule, addition of the Privacy Commissioner to the Schedule
of the Act; and
• section 15 so far as it relates to this paragraph.
Madam President , these sections will align with
(a) the commencement of the remainder of the Personal Information Protection Act (or PIPA) 2016, and (b) the commencement of the Personal Information
Protection Amendment Act 2023. The 2023 Act harmo-nises with the PATI Act , removing those sections that had conflicting or overlapping personal information pro-visions between the two. Requests for one’s own information will be governed by the Personal Information Protection Act 2016 once the remaining portions are
enacted on the 1
st of January 2025.
Madam President , a later date of commencement will be provided for the remaining sections and
Schedules of this PATI Amendment Act 2024 , as guidance and transitional provisions are established along with training materials and templates for ease of implementation.
Madam President , PATI has played a beneficial role in providing access to records held by public
authorities and at the same time has encouraged the
routine publication of information by authorities to help
the public understand how the Government operates
and how decisi ons are made. Both of these contribute
to the very purpose of the legislation—that is , to provide
access to government records , to increase transparency and eliminate unnecessary secrecy , to increase
accountability of public authorities and to inform the public about the activities of the Government. These
amendments serve to strengthen the PATI regime
within public authorities while balancing the management of requests with existing resources. Guidance and related information on these amendm ents will be
published by the Government as procedures evolve.
Thank you, Madam President .

The President: And thank you, Senator Mischa Fubler,
the Junior Minister for the Cabinet Office.
Would any Senator care to speak on this Bill?
Senator De Couto, you have the floor.

Thank you, Madam President, and thank you to Senator Fubler for that presentation.
In thinking about this Bill, this amendment, I
tried to think about it in a couple of different ways. So the first thing is, you know, we have heard in the [brief],
What does Government say the problem is? The sec-ond thing is, What do their actions and other words indicate the problem is that they really want to solve for
themselves? And the third thing I would put to you is, Madam President, What is the actual problem that
should be solved? And in an ideal world, we would like
to say that all of those thi ngs align. Unfortunately,
sometimes when we come to the Senate and we actually dig into the legislation and listen to the [briefs], and
we see the actual facts and figures of what is going on, we can see where they do not always align.
To me, this amendment Bill is a prime example
of that. So we heard earlier in the [brief] about the un-reasonable burden on stressed resources. And I get it.
We cannot have the civil service overwhelmed. We can
admit that. But we also know from extensive d iscussion
from the Senator’s colleagues in another place the concern of most of the Government MPs seems to be
82 11 December 202 4 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda Senate about articles in The Royal Gazette. That is not what
this Bill is about.
And the real problem, I would put to you,
Madam President, is when I hear about unreasonable
burden on stressed resources or hear in the [brief] that certain departments are getting more than their fair
share. The real [question] we should ask is, Why are
we not properly resourcing those departments? Why
are the records not being stored efficiently? Why,
Madam President, do some departments get (quote –
unquote) more than their fair share? And I would put to
you, Madam President, those are the questions that we
should be asking. And the Bill does not answer any of
those questions. The Bill does not provide more resources.
In fact, I would say [the reason why] the departments that are getting more than their fair share is prob-ably something that is going on there that people need
to hear about and want to hear about. A couple of great
examples that we heard . . . And I think everybody
(quote –unquote), all right-thinking people would agree
that PATI is good. Transparency is good. And that these examples that I am going to give you are examples that were indeed in the public’s interest.
We learned about the details of how much
money has been spent on the Gaming Commission. I
believe $16.5 million. People are pretty concerned and
glad that they learned about that. We learned about the details of Gencom not being able to make its severance
payments and how the Government had to step in and
make those severance payments for them to the tune of $11 million. I think that was also in the public interest,
and most people are glad that they learned about that.
We learned about the details of the B ELCO emissions
and how they are affecting people in Pembrook,
Madam President. Those people were glad for PATI to get those details. We learned about issues with the his-torical land losses, Commission of Inquiry and why
things were not going so well there.
And I would put it to you, Madam President,
that the department and any government departments
(I think we can probably put it out there) where the general rule is that they are under -resourced and do not
have enough people to do their thing . . . (Excuse me. I
lost my train of thought.)
I have used PATI, Madam President. I used
PATI to get detailed records of the budget data in electronic format so you could work on them as a professional might work with that information. That information would not have been provided without PATI. I have used PATI to get information about the entrustment between the Bermuda Government and the British Government that outlined how relative power or capabilities are shared there. I am pretty sure if I just sent
an email, they would not respond to that. So you have
to use this legal tool to get that.
But PATI is not just for Senators, and it is not
just for journalists. It is for Mr. and Mrs. Smith, right? It
is a tool that people could say, I want to find out more what the Government did in this situation that impacted
me. We have seen things in the uniformed services
where PATI was used for people to understand how cases were handled or not handled.
So sometimes those things take a long time.
And I would put to you that this Government in general—some departments are really good to work with,
and some departments are not. And you find out. When
you get the answer, you find out why they were not.
They work very hard to hide the information, delay the
information, redact the information.
In the [brief] we heard that often people ask
very broad questions. Well, if you are not given enough information to even know how to narrow the question,
what other kind of question can you ask? If a government department or a quango or a board does not publish minutes, does not publish meeting schedules, does not publish financials, it is pretty tough. Your first question has to be, Hey, supply me all of that stuff.
There was a statement in the [brief] that this
has encouraged routine publications of records from
the government. You know, yes, in some areas. But I
would say in many important areas, we have seen
things like the BTA [Bermuda Tourism Authority], the
Gaming Commission, some areas of some hot public
interest where they have gone over and above trying to
hide that information. So I say, thank goodness that we have PATI!
So I really do not like this Bill. And I think this
Government is passing this Bill to solve a problem that is not the problem that should be solved. The problem
that should be solved is resourcing. We have heard
about the $25 million surplus, but nothing in here about
resourcing, training. Perhaps we could pass laws that
require all quangos, committees, boards, ministries to
make publicly available a wide swathe of information.
I know one thing from the Government was,
Oh, this Bill is just like they have in other jurisdictions.
Maybe certain details or certain qualities in the Bill are.
But the overall picture is not. Because in those other
jurisdictions, they give more resource to this problem.
They require bodies to make certain records public by
default. You do not even need a PATI request to get
them, for example.
We heard reference to the consultation with the
Information Commissioner. I would say that consultation was perhaps not particularly fulsome or I would
suggest that her feedback was not taken on. If you permit me, Madam President, I would like to quote from her statement regarding this amendment, just a few
brief sentences.

The President: You may.

I quote: “The current
amendments lack important safeguards for the provi-sions to be administered fairly and effectively.” (And I
quote a second sentence:) “These amendments are
not accompanied by robust commitment by the


Bermuda Senate Government to ensure appropriate training and resources are available to the public officers who must
process PATI requests.” (And the third one I will quote:)
“Proper application of the existing PATI provisions
could more effectively solve the challenges identified
by the Government. ”
So when I hear those, it takes me back to many
other topics that have come to the Senate where we heard about consultation, and then we heard from the
people who were supposed to have been consulted,
and you get a very different message. And if the Infor-mation Commissioner is not our national expert on this,
I do not know who is.
Now, let me make a couple of detailed comments and I will conclude with my specific questions,
Madam President. I do have a concern here that if you
are in a department that has perhaps hot -topic information, you are in fact de- incentivised through this Bi ll
to improve your record- keeping or to invest in your systems. In fact, you will be incentivised to say , Take all
your meeting Minutes and put them in a file folder and stick them somewhere that is hard to find and so forth.
Perhaps these limits could hav e been fine- tuned. I do
not like them at all, but they could have been fine- tuned.
Perhaps a department that has manual record processing, paper -based processes could have a longer
limit than a department that has a digital set of pro-cesses and data. Do you see what I am saying, Madam President? Thereby they get credit for investing in their
record- keeping.

The President: Senator De Couto, do you have specific questions?

Yes.
I am concerned, Madam President, What provisions will there be for people in financial hardship who cannot pay the PATI fees? So that is one question.
I am concerned, Madam President, that the
way I read the Bill, it does seem to just be a hard cut -
off at 16 hours. And I am not a lawyer, so I cannot un-derstand how the mechanics work that actually require
a department to go over the 16 hours when they do not
want to. So I would like an explanation for that, Madam
President.
I am concerned that there is not language
around topics of national interest or public interest types of extensions.
And then I think I would close, Madam President, with asking. We had some statistics about the PATI requests. But how many, if they pick the last nine
months or however the statistics are grouped, how
many of them would actually have been subject to
these limits? And how much money would have had to
have been charged if this amendment had been in ef-fect?
Then I will close with a comment, Madam President. If you look in the OBA Platform, we have actually
made a commitment about transparency that would actually, some of these comments I made, that would
require certain bodies, departments, boards to make
certain sets of financial, meeting Minutes and so forth
available to the public by default. And that would be the
stance that we would take.
But I think I had my three questions and my
comments. And I appreciate the time, Madam President.
The President: Thank you, Senator De Couto.
Senator John Wight, you have the floor.

Sen. John Wight: Thank you, Madam President.
As you know from having heard me speak in
the Senate over several years, I am a staunch supporter of good governance. It does not matter whether
it be a private or public company, a non- profit or government, any organisation of any kind works more effectively if strong governance, transparency and best
practices are adopted.
The Government of Bermuda website says
quite clearly when you read it public access to information lets you ask a public authority for records to help
you understand the work that goes on in the public authority and how it makes decisions. This makes the e ntire government more accountable and also removes
unnecessary secrecy.
When PATI was approved into law in 2010, I
viewed this as a great step in the right direction for Bermuda. Unfortunately, I do not see the intention of PATI
being executed since its adoption as it was intended to.
In my view, too often the public gets denied information
that they are entitled to and should have. Also in my view, the outgoing Information Commissioner and her
team have done a very good job, albeit under unnecessarily difficult conditions.
To better understand best practices in public
access to information, I read with interest a document
prepared in 2021 in Canada called Observations and
Recommendations on the Government of Canada’s
Review of the Access to Information Regime. It reads —
if you will allow me to quote, Madam President?

The President: You may.

Sen. John Wight: “For the access regime to work
properly, senior government leaders and heads of government institutions will have to show strong leadership
and make a clear commitment to promoting transpar-ency and the disclosure of information. This leadership
is essential in bringing about a cultural shift within the
government and requires the following:
• Take every necessary measure to ensure that
government institutions respect the existing
legislation . . .
• Be transparent from the outset and disclose
more information voluntarily and independently of the legal obligation . . .
84 11 December 202 4 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda Senate • Ensure that institutions immediately take the
measures needed to review and improve their
access to information process in order to reduce response times.”
All of what I have just read, Madam President,
resonates with me. It aligns with my views of strong
governance for progressive jurisdictions. When I read this Bill line by line, which I did, I found myself disagreeing with the reasons provided for why this legislation is
better, more effective and more efficient for our jurisdiction.
I am disappointed with the Bill being proposed
today, Madam President, as it contradicts good practices. Madam President, that is all I have to say on this
matter.
Thank you.

The President: Thank you, Senator John Wight.
Would any other Senator care to speak on this
Bill?
Vice President Kiernan Bell, you have the floor.
Sen. Kiernan Bell: Thank you, Madam President.
One of the concerns that I had reading this Bill,
and it is a question, I suppose, that needs to be posed, is, Will the recourse for a pre- emptively refused request
for information . . . So the Information Officer determines that the request for information that has been made is going to take more than 16 hours. The next
step is for that decision to be reviewed, assuming that
that request cannot be further narrowed to make it more concise or gather more information.
So my question is, How is that additional layer
of, or additional step been taken into account in making this amendment? Bearing in mind that in other jurisdictions where there is a similar approach in terms of as-signing a cost or a fee if a PATI request (or a Freedom
of Information Act request in other jurisdictions) is being
made, that trigger is reached, a fee notice (in other jurisdictions) is sent out. If you want to continue with this Freedom of Information request, it is now on the clock,
if I can put it that way, and it is going to incur a fee because the information is taking considerable time to find.
In Bermuda it seems we are taking a slightly
different step. And we are defining that appropriate limit as 16 hours. And the question is, What then is the re-course for someone whose request is refused because
an information officer determines pre- emptivel y, presumably before they have logged the request because
that gets the clock going, that this request is going to
take more than 16 hours? What then happens? Does
that then get reviewed by the Information Commissioner? Is there then going to be a judicial review proceeding in the Supreme Court? Is this going to create
an additional layer of cost and delay for requests? And
has that been taken into account by the Government in proposing this particular amendment?
Thank you. The President: Thank you, Vice President Kiernan
Bell.
Would any other Senator care to speak on this
Bill?
Senator Dwayne Robinson, you have the floor.

Sen. Dwayne Robinson: Thank you, Madam President.
My colleague really covered the main concerns. But I just also want to highlight that we have to
be cognisant of the message that we send out with legislation. We need to make sure that we are addressing
the issues that are being listed.
And to me, I think the way that the Government
is approaching this is not a method in which it is promoting transparency. I believe it is the opposite. And in
this case, I think it would have been more plausible for the Government to lead with a bit more solution- based
measures when it comes to PATI and transparency.
Because again, on one hand the community is told that
the fiscal position of the Government is good, the economy is great and therefore we have excess funds that
we did not originally have. But on the flip side, it then
says, But you have to pay for anything exceeding a 16hour PATI request. And I think that it is a conflicting
message there because this is something that I think
most of the public would appreciate the Government placing more funds into to ensure that transparency is
of maximum importance.
So my question goes to the other side of what
Senator Bell was mentioning. We have now seen leg-islation come forward, an amendment that stipulates 16
hours. And then after 16 hours you receive a bill. My question is, If you have received notice that this particular PATI request that you put in will not exceed 16
hours, and then something happens on the government’s end, am I now on the hook for something that
originally I was told would not cost me anything, and
now if I want to complete it, I get a fee? S o will the respective Ministry commit that, if they communicate to
this person that this is a free PATI request because it
will not exceed 16 hours, they will stick to that regardless of whatever drawbacks they may encounter on
their side?
Many of us who have worked with government
departments understand that there are hangups. And
civil servants are forced to extend their lines for things
that are sometimes outside of their control. If that is the
case, will this legislation protect the person who has submitted their PATI request who should be under 16
hours so that they will not be subject to a fee for any
inconvenience on the other side of this?
Also, I just would like to ask the Junior Minister,
How does this particular fee assist government with
what seems to be staffing issues when you have people doing two jobs in a sense, where they have to do
their own responsibilities and take on something with
PATI? So if you are increasing the fee on something
going over 16 hours and the Ministry intends to either


Bermuda Senate deny every single PATI request exceeding 16 hours or
take it on, the additional payment only seems to benefit
the government coffers. It does not seem to benefit the
civil servant in any way. They are still doing the same
amount of heavy lifting on top of their responsibilities.
It does not really address the problems of efficiency and staffing and needing more support and resources. This legislation only seeks to really line government’s coffers in a sense because it does not address the staffing issues that are occurring. That w ill still
occur after this Bill if this Bill should pass. And I think
that this is something that Government needs to address. And I would like to hear from the Junior Minister
if there is any forward thinking on how efficiencies and
staffing can be handled to support the civil service. We
want to promote PATI; we do not want to stifle it. And
we do not want to pass legislation meant to deter peo-ple from utilising it.
If we see that there are certain ministries that
are getting increased requests , instead of looking at dis-incentivising our community from making requests,
we need to look at making those particular ministries
more transparent, as my colleague spoke of.
Also, I would like to pose another question to
the Junior Minister as well. Would not this legislation
potentially just create more, smaller, targeted, under -
16-hour PATI requests that will compound into the
same amount of work for the civil service if, instead of asking one big broad question that takes me 24 hours
or 38 hours, I ask six smaller PATI requests of things
that I believe are more targeted under 16 hours? It still equates to the same amount of work on the civil service. They will still be doing PATI requests longer than
16 hours. It will just be broken into smaller, potentially
more targeted PATI requests that stay underneath that
radar. For me, it does not seem to address the issue.
So, I just wonder what the Junior Minister’s
thoughts are on that because in my opinion, if I wanted
to . . . One thing about Bermuda and Bermudians, if we
can avoid a fee, we will! We will find a way to avoid a
fee. Because we have been conditioned in our high -
cost-of-living society that we know how to make sure
that we stay within the free zone. So does this really
help the civil servants if they are now going to be inun-dated with, instead of six large PATI requests they can
have 10 smaller ones (if you get what I mean, Madam
President)?
So, with that, I would just like to hear the Junior
Minister’s thoughts on those particular questions. And
with that I will conclude. Thank you.

The President: Thank you, Senator Robinson.
Would any other Senator care to speak on this
Bill?
Minister Wilkerson, Attorney General, you
have the floor.
Sen. the Hon. Kim Wilkerson: Thank you very much,
Madam President. And good morning to the listening audience.
This has been an interesting conversation,
hearing the comments from across the aisle. And let me start by saying, Madam President, people would
recognise that a Bill of this nature at the drafting stage
would come before me, or it is called legislative c ounsel, and with the Ministry. And we sit around the table to go through the Bill and see if it meets the needs that
were set out.
And some of the concerns that I have heard
raised from across the floor, I too raised, I will admit.
Having a concern for, as Senator De Couto points out,
Mrs. Smith and a concern [as to] are we limiting the opportunity for access to Mrs. Smith with a fee structure?
Which I believe is what most of the concern about the
fee structure is, that it might force her to perhaps reconsider her request. And I am confident, Madam President, that that is not the intention of the Government
here.
I understand that a balance absolutely has to
be had. I have had the experience of being in the position (in my role in a previous place, as the chairman of
the board of an authority) of having to answer PATI requests, understanding the complete amount of time
that would be taken by an entire staff answering requests that were not specific in nature or that were designed for a purpose other than to arm Mrs. Smith with
information that would enable her to exercise her rights
as a citizen.
Sometimes —oftentimes, Madam President,
these requests are coming from another place perhaps designed to embarrass a public authority to launder,
hang dirty laundry, as you might say, and not for a good
purpose. And I believe that as I said earlier, it is the idea
of striking a balance between the needs of the average
citizen (and I think the requests of average citizens are
generally met) versus other kinds of needs.
I heard my colleague across the floor, Senator
De Couto, create a long list of the benefits that we have
seen from the regime already around things that are in the public interest that the average citizen would have
wanted to know. And this regime has given them the
ability to get that information and hear it through The
Royal Gazette or through other means. But, Madam
President, there is, as I have said, a balance to be met.
And we look very carefully as to how that balance could
be met.
I certainly pushed back on the idea of a fee.
And I asked, you know, What does this look like against other jurisdictions? Are we doing something that is out
of step? And in fact, we pushed back and got more information. We asked the technical officers and the Ministry of Cabinet Office to come back to the table to give
confidence that we were not out of step in how we were
looking at amending the legislation for the purpose.
I have heard the comments about, you know,
perhaps a way to do this is to simply revise how we
86 11 December 202 4 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda Senate store information. Having come from international business into this role a few months ago, I agree. We need
to revise the way that we store information in government. But I will remind my colleagues across the floor
that, if they should win the next elect ion, they will inherit
these same paper files that we are trying to deal with
right now. We will not suddenly be a digitised civil service as a result of a new election or the election of a
new Government if that is what will happen. So they will
be faced with the same problems that we have, your
important functioning civil service being completely diverted sometimes to deal with requests that are not
made within the spirit of PATI.
And I would remind members of the listening
public that it was the Progressive Labour Party that
brought the PATI legislation because we are stewards
of transparency. We recognised that this was important for the people of Bermuda. That is why we brought the
legislation in the first place. So, I think it is difficult now
to hear the intent of PATI, I believe, being undermined
in a way. While I do at the same time understand the concerns that we continue forward in a way that guarantees the transparency, th at we deal with this legislation and request it sensitively in a way that is in line with
the spirit of why PATI was instituted in the first place, Madam President.
So, for all of those reasons, I understand some
of the concerns raised because, as I said, I had them too. I am satisfied on balance that what the Government is doing at this point is in the best interest of the
people of Bermuda so that we can continue t o have a
thriving ethos where information is shared and where
transparency is promoted.
I have heard the conversation and the call perhaps for information. And I agree. There needs to be
more education for requesters. And this is something
that I have raised, more education for requesters. I have raised this with the Minister for the Office of the
Cabinet around requests so that people understand the nature of making a request: How to make a request
specific; how not to go on a fishing expedition. And I
accept that that must be part and parcel of how we roll
out to 2025 the spirit of this leg islation.
So, thank you, Madam President.
The President: Thank you, Minister Wilkerson.
Senator Hodgson, Arianna Hodgson, you have
the floor.

Sen. Arianna Hodgson: Thank you, Madam President.
I did just want to speak briefly in support of the
Bill today. Like my colleagues in the room, I am too of the notion that we should do all that we can to do a
better job at sharing the information that the government holds, the various public authorities hold. And as
[Minister] Wilkerson spoke to, we were the Government
that moved to ensure that this type of transparency and
accountability is a function of our government. So as always, I have been doing a bit of thinking. And like my
colleague mentioned, we all in the room had the same
question: Is a fee necessary? Is the fee appropriate?
And we went through the exercise of weighing the pros
and cons of implementing such legislation.
And I myself had asked a question of a public
authority recently. And I was not intending to make a
PATI request. However, the fact that I had asked for
this information, they determined that it could be or
should be treated as a PATI request. It was interesting,
because I actually had a member of a public authority reach out to say, Hey. Let me have a conversation with
you. Let’s get some clarity around the information
you’re looking for. What is the intended goal of reach of
the information you are looki ng for? And let’s make sure
we can both get on the same page, that we can ensure that the time is being used efficiently. And there was an instance where she said, You know, this might take a
bit longer perhaps. And then we would be able to set
another timeline that let me know that she was still working toward collecting that information.
So, when I think about our role as the Government and our management of such a framework, it is
important that we consider things like resource management. Who is responsible for the work? What additional work are they responsible for already in their day -
to-day work? I remember when the legislation was
rolled out, I had signed up for my PIPA and PATI train-ing. And I went through all of those exercises. So now
to be on the other side, I am able to think a bit differently
about the execution of such a framework.
Senator Robinson spoke to, I guess, our limiting one’s ability to ask a full question. But I think it is important that in going through this exercise we recognise that we want persons to be clear on what it is that
they are asking for. I know that we hav e some teachers
in this space, and sometimes just figuring out the question and then answering it is a task in itself. So I want
to actually encourage . . . and I think the point of this
exercise is to encourage making our requests more
specific. And when I think about precision, more targeted information requests, I think that we will get to a
place where we are more efficiently processing and addressing the requests that the public have.
But at the same time, we cannot discount the
fact that we are constantly looking for ways as a Government to share more information, to make sure that
the public is better informed, to make sure that Mr. and
Mrs. Smith understand the works that we are doi ng.
It is interesting because I was also watching a
video on YouTube. And it was the journalist’s point of view. And it was the American journalists talking about
how they kind of manipulated the US system to work
for them in some instances. And I get the goal of journalism. But essentially, as a public authority, there is
work that must be done. I think that I would love to be
part of the conversations that say, Hey! How can we do
more to get the information out there? And I think about
board meeting Minutes and all of the rest. I think that


Bermuda Senate we can envision a future that makes all of these things
more accessible.
I was having a conversation yesterday and we
were talking about the fact that in the future there will
be fewer big companies and more small companies be-cause fewer persons will be able to do more with less.
And it changes the way that we operate. It changes the
way that we provide systems and services as a government. And so while we could sit and talk about whether
or not it is fair or whether or not it was intended to limit
a person’s option to access public records, I think this is more about just being reasonable.
And I think that it is reasonable to introduce a
fee that says that after 16 hours of research and efforts to provide a response to your request, then perhaps a
fee is suitable. And as has been discussed here and in
other spaces, we are not moving in unison . This is
something that other jurisdictions have already explored. There were some who have lower amounts and some who have significantly higher amounts. And so, I
think that we do find ourselves somewhere in the mid-dle.
I think that concludes my comments on this
one, Madam President.
The President: Thank you, Senator Hodgson.
Would any other Senator care to speak on this
Bill?
Senator Tucker, you have the floor.
Sen. Robin Tucker: Thank you, Madam President.
I will just be just a few probably seconds because I think that everything that I would want to say has already been said by my Senate colleagues clearly on this side of the aisle.
But I just wanted to highlight something. The
Junior Minister just a second ago said that the Govern-ment is always looking for ways to share more information with the public. And so one of the things, one of
the ways I think that the Government could actu ally do
that is with the information that is extracted or provided by PATI requests. Where there are consistent themes
or multiple themes or what have you, then why could
not that information be made public on the public web-site somewhere? That reduces the number of requests
that are made because that information is already readily available. So that is just one way that they could increase transparency, increase accountability and also
hopefully reduce the number of requests that are made.
People are asking questions because they obviously want answers. So, if certain answers are things that are of national public interest, for instance, when
people ask those types of questions, then they should
be made public. Right?
I do have one question in particular. (The others that I had have already been asked.) But I do have a question as it relates to refusal of a request, and that
is the ability to refuse in connection with the opinion of
the public officer if they deem it to be vexatious or repetitive or what have you. So my question is . . . I do
not know in the regulations or where will there be any
guidelines for that, because that is quite subjective and
quite broad. If it is in your opinion or my opinion or what
have you, we could have different opinions. So is there fairness across the board to ensure that when those
opinions are determined that they are within certain parameters, so that it is not just a very easy and general
thing because that particular official who has received
that request is just dismissing it because they do not
want to deal with it?
So as my colleagues have already said . . . and
if I have not been clear, I have some concerns as well.
And so I look forward to hearing the answers to the
questions that have already been asked.
Thank you, Madam President.

The President: Thank you, Senator Tucker.
Would any other Senator care to speak?
Minister Darrell, you have the floor.

Sen. the Hon. Owen Darrell: Thank you, Madam President. And while we know that this is a very important
Bill, and I want to thank the Junior Minister for bringing
his first Bill to this Chamber, I am struggling. Madam
President, I am struggling because in the three Senators who have spoken from the other side of the aisle, I
have yet to hear a clear indication of whether they sup-port this or they do not. Yes, we all have questions. And
even on this side of the aisle, we have sat with the technical officers. We have sat with the Minis ter of the Cabinet Office, and we have asked those questions.
We have said, Oh, okay, great. Wonderful. And
we say, You know what? We’re going to support this.
But I heard from one particular speaker from the other
side a lot of vague references to “they.” And I take exception to that, Madam President. I really do because I
can only assume that the “they” that that Senator was
referring to is the hard- working tec hnical officers whom
we have working for this Bermuda Government who
support us as Ministers and serve the people of this
country every single day.
And when we talk about “they” and we refer to
them as “they,” I struggle. Because “they” whom we are
referring to—

The Senator is imputing
motive and also misleading the Senate.
So thank you, Madam President.

The President: Carry on.

88 11 December 202 4 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda Senate Sen. the Hon. Owen Darrell: Madam President, thank
you.
The “they” —I will repeat —strikes me as odd.
And I can only imagine the technical officers who are
listening to this debate who work hard to support us and to support the research that Senator De Couto may
have a lot of time to do . . . they also have subs tantive
jobs that they have to do, Madam President. And we
happen to have public officers, technical officers in the
Chamber with us today. So I will tell them right here
right now, Thank you for the work that they do.
But just imagine. Just imagine, Madam President, if someone asked you—“they” —to find all communications that have been put on record on a particu-lar topic for the last 10 years. Follow this now, Madam
President. Imagine if “they” in those departments had
very little administrative staff, meaning that technical
staff had to be the ones conducting searches and processing these requests. Imagine that. These are people whom we are talking about, Madam President. And
I will go as far as to say proud workers of t he civil service.
And then we would get up here, certain people,
certain individuals, and question the Government as to, Why are substantive tasks not being completed? I un-derstand, as we have seen previously today, that
maybe the job of the Opposition is just to nitpick an d
complain. Maybe; I do not know. But you cannot have
it both ways, Madam President. Because for these public officers, I can attest that much of their work that they
do goes unseen, Madam President. They put their heads down, they work hard, they serve the people of
this country. They support the ministers, and they go
home to their families. They are people. They are not “they.”
And if I have not already, I want to take this opportunity to commend the hard- working public servants
for their work, including the team of technical experts
who are sitting here who put this Bill together. These
technical officers have been tied up trying to answer
every single question. Believe it or not, the fee which
we have spent most of this time discussing today,
Madam President, is directly connected to the hourly
rates that it would take these public officers to respond to all of these requests. A nd as was said by Senator
Wight in his contribution, this aligns with international
best practices.
So to go on, I want to echo the comments of
the Attorney General, Senator the Hon. Kim Wilkerson.
And part of the reason that we are excited for the Junior Minister, Senator Mischa Fubler, to join us in this
Chamber and to join us when he walked into the P rogressive Labour Party is the technical experience that
he has. It is the passion that he has to digitise the government and to really dig in, as the Senator said, to the
years of data, the years of files. And he can look at it and put it in digital format and assist with that in ways
that will make sense to the general public. I am pleased, Madam President, to support this
Bill, if I did not say it already, if it was not obvious. I
support this Bill. And I am pleased that the person to
usher this amendment through this upper House is
Senator and Junior Minister Mischa Fubler.
Thank you, Madam President.

The President: Thank you, Minister Darrell.
It is then over to you, Senator Mischa Fubler,
to respond.
Sen. Mischa Fubler: All right. Thanks, Madam President.
There were several questions relayed throughout the Senators’ responses, and so I am going to endeavour to touch on all of them. And I just wanted to
start with, you know, I have joined this process nearing the end of it, right, as the Bill is being brought to the
Senate. I myself needed to conduct some research to
get a feel for whether what was being proposed was
appropriate. So, I took some time to look around at
other jurisdictions. And I just want to highlight a few of
them that I came across that I fo und interesting.
Starting with Sweden, who feels so strongly
about freedom of information that there are four core
laws which kind of constitute their Constitution, including their Freedom of Information Act. And it is notable that even with their prioritisation, the Act explicitly mentions that they are under no obligation to provide electronic copies of the documents. Citizens are welcome
to attend the relevant public agency to review them.
They have a nominal fee, so they are definitely on the
lower end for receiving co pies. They still mention faxing
in their Bill, so maybe it is time for some updates there.
But that is on the one scale.
If we look at places like Australia, they have the
Freedom of Information Act 1982, where the fee is not explicit in the Act, and it is at the discretion of the
agency or minister. And so again it is good that we are
setting something that is commensurate with the cost
of a policy analyst, on average, and that is typically who would be reviewing and responding to the request.
Several of the Opposition Senators mentioned
concerns around, Well, you know, poor record- keeping,
and how long is it going to take to find this? It is important to note that the search and retrieval is not included in this estimation of time, and that it is intended
for this to be a collaborative process.
I think Senator Robinson asked about surprise
billing. The information officer is mandated to offer guidance on how to reduce the request such that it falls
under the 16- hour limit. So, I do not really know if there
is any kind of substantive concern aroun d the surprise
now; it is more than 16 hours. Although to be fair, you
know, it is an estimate. They are doing some sampling
on the records and basing an estimate on that sample.
So there may be some unforeseen additional work required. But as I mentioned, that will be collaboration.
(Just going back through my notes here.)


Bermuda Senate On the electronic format, I just made that notice
for Senator De Couto. I doubt those requests take more
than 16 hours, so they will still be provided as requested.
And I also wanted to ask . . . I do not know if I
can ask questions of the questioners, but was there an
information request submitted? My understanding
through being briefed by the technical officers is that it
is possible to submit an information request which
[does not need] to conform to the Regulations of PATI. And some departments are more than happy to provide information through that method.
And also in this, any and all to go fishing, as a
fellow computer scientist I would like to think that when you first interrogate a new data structure, maybe thousands, millions of records, you do not select all from the
table. You do some sampling to get a feel for where
would be more effective to request additional data. I
think in this case breaking it down into 16- hour increments, even if submitting several, will serve as kind of
a rate limiter to help balance the service delivery of that public author ity and the need to access the information.
I have some support as well from my technical officer
here that I will pull up.
Questions around affordability . . . there is no
waiver provision in the legislation. However, there are
several options if the processing of the request exceeds the appropriate limit. The first we have men-tioned a few times now wherein the information officer
can recommend refinement of the request being more
specific, such that it is under the 16 hours, an agree-ment of the requester to have the authority process the
request as an information request, which I just touched
on, rather than a PATI request. The public authority can also consider publishing the records if it is thought that
the release of those records is in the public interest, in response to Senator Tucker’s question.
Continuing on . . . right. So there was a question raised around training. We should note again that the implementation dates of the various sections of the
Bill are such that it is staggered so that the information
officers will have time to accommodate training specifically around the sections that have the fee involved.
To Senator Bell’s questions around pre- emptive denial because the estimate is over 16 hours, the legislation still lays out opportunities for requesting review of the decision. And then also that review is to the
internal review first, and then to the Information Commissioner’s office and subsequent to that even to the
judiciary if needed. So I think there is still adequate op-portunity there if someone feels that their request is unduly denied.
And to multiple requests being submitted, there
is also [clause] 16(3) around repetitive requests for the same or similar information, it is that rate- limiting of
three months. So, that serves to help reduce the risk of
still seeing that overwhelming of the service delivery of
that public authority. And I think that Mr. and Mrs.
Smith, if they just want to be informed, will be okay with its taking longer to receive the information as opposed
to having thousands of documents retrieved and reviewed and provid ed to make headlines; or, as some of
the other Senators mentioned, attempting to embarrass the Government.
There was a question around how many requests exceeded the 16 hours. I had a similar question
for the technical officers when I joined the team. Unfortunately, it is not monitored. There is no requirement to
monitor the time other than to prove administrat ive burden. And the Information Commissioner’s Office [ICO]
does not include that statistic. I recommend that, if you
are so inclined, we should recommend to the ICO that
they start to capture that detail. I will be doing so as
well. I am keen to see how many are refused by exceeding the maximum limit and how many are not processed once being informed that it exceeds the appro-priate limit.
There were some other questions. We touched
on the mid- year review, the $25 million. I challenge
Senators to make the argument that it is more important
to provide historical records than to provide assistance
to national security and mental health. Maybe there is
a better balance that could be struck, but to try and highlight that as a failing and not diverting that resource
to the public authorities for record retrieval just feels
callous.
And the statement around the $60 an hour having no impact on resourcing, I think those of us in leadership or managerial positions understand that all of the
work that your team undertakes has a cost. So if we
have these kinds of consistent requests, that $60 an
hour being commensurate with a policy analyst, you can then project, You know what, I’m going to see this
many requests over here . I can then budget for a policy
analyst whose task is then to do the record processing
and supply to those making PATI requests.
What else do we have? We did the smaller requests. I think I captured responses there to all of the
requests.
I just want to end with, you know, I did some
research first to inform myself on the situation. And one
of our frequently referenced comparable jurisdictions is
Cayman. They have a Freedom of Information [Law]
(2020 Revision). Section 9(c) states “A public authority
is not required to comply with a request where—(a) the
request is vexatious; (b) the public authority has recently complied with a substantially similar request from the same person; (c) compliance with the request
would unreasonably divert its resources; or (d) the information requested is already in the public domain.”
This reads almost verbatim to what we are proposing for the amendment, or what is already part of the Act. It is also important to note, for their costs, section 13(1), “ The communication of information may be
made conditional upon the payment by the person making the request of a reasonable fee which shall not
exceed the actual cost of searching for, reproducing,
preparing and communicating the information. ”
90 11 December 202 4 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda Senate So it is important to note there that they are
charging for the search and reproduction as well,
whereas the search and retrieval in our amendment is
exempt from that 16- hour appropriate limit.
On that note, unless I missed anything, Madam
President, I will conclude my response.

The President: Certainly you may and you can move
your Bill.

Sen. Mischa Fubler: I move that the Bill entitled Public
Access to Information Amendment Act 2024 be read a
second time.

The President: Is there any object to the second reading?
No objection.

Sen. Mischa Fubler: I move that the Senate do now
resolve itself into a Committee . . . no? I do not?

The President: No.

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 26
Sen. Mischa Fubler: Okay. I move that [Standing Order] 26 be suspended.
The President: Is there any objection to that?
No objection.
[Motion carried: Standing Order 26 suspended.]
Sen. Mischa Fubler: I now move that the Bill [entitled]
Public Access to Information Amendment Act 2024 be
read a third time.
The President: Is there any objection to the third reading of the Bill?
No objection.

BILL

THIRD READING

PUBLIC ACCESS TO INFORMATION
AMENDMENT ACT 2024

Sen. Mischa Fubler: Madam President, I move that
the Bill pass.

The President: Senator De Couto.

To the motion that the Bill
do pass. Thank you, Madam President.

The President: Would any other Senator like to
speak?
Senator Robinson.
Sen. Dwayne Robinson: Madam President, I second
that. Thank you.
The President: We have three—
Senator Tucker.

Sen. Robin Tucker: Yes, thank you, Madam President.
I object as well.

The President: It appears we have three objections
and therefore we will take a vote.
[Pause]
The President: Senators, we are going to take a vote
on the passage of the Bill.

The vote is on the passage of the
Public Access to Information Amendment Act 2024, the
passage of it.
All of those in favour of passing it say Aye. All
of those against say Nay.

DIVISION
[Public Access to Information Amendment Act 2024,
third reading and passage]

Ayes: 8 Nays: 3
Sen. the Hon. O. Darrell Sen. Dr. D. De Couto
Sen. Arianna Hodgson Sen. D. Robinson
Sen. Mischa Fubler Sen. Robin Tucker
Sen. Lindsay Simmons
Sen. the Hon. Kim Wilkerson
Sen. Kiernan Bell
Sen. John Wight
Sen. the Hon. J. Dillas -Wright

The Deputy Clerk: So, with a vote of eight to three, the
Bill passes.

The President: Yes. And I will repeat that.
The vote is eight to three on the passage of the
Bill. Therefore, the Bill is passed.
[Motion carried by a majority on division: The Public Access to Information Amendment Act 2024 was read a third time and passed.]

The President: Thank you, Senators. And thank you,
Senator Mischa Fubler, for presenting your Bill.


Bermuda Senate With that, Senators, we will now move on to the
second item on our Orders of the Day. And that is the
second reading of the Employment Amendment Act
2024. That is in the name of Senator Arianna Hodgson,
the spokesperson for Economy and Labour.
Senator Hodgson, when you are ready you can
present your Bill.

STANDING ORDER 25
Sen. Arianna Hodgson: Thank you, Madam President.
I do want to move that the provisions of Standing Order 25 be granted so that we can proceed with the second readings of both this Bill and the Bill that
was just previously passed.

The President: Is there any objection to that motion?
No objection.
[Motion carried: Leave granted for Employment
Amendment Act 2024 and the Public Access to Information Amendment Act 2024 to be read a second time
on the same day as its first reading.]
Sen. Arianna Hodgson: Thank you, Madam President.
I move that the Bill entitled the Employment
Amendment Act 2024, be now read a second time.
The President: Is there any objection to the second
reading?
No objection.

BILL

SECOND READING

EMPLOYMENT AMENDMENT ACT 2024
Sen. Arianna Hodgson: Thank you, Madam President.
I am pleased to present the Bill entitled the Employment Amendment Act 2024, which seeks to amend
the Employment Act 2000 to increase the maximum
severance allowance payment from 26 weeks wages to
32 weeks wages.
Madam President, severance allowance is designed to provide employees with a level of financial stability and to assist with covering essential expenses when they lose their employment prematurely and
through no fault of their own. Madam President, job loss
can be a significant source of stress and disquiet, especially for persons who have been employed by one employer for a significant period of time. Increasing the
severance allowance payable can help alleviate the
fears associated with sudden job loss, provide a sense
of financial security and avert the need for persons to rely on financial assistance. Madam President, increasing the severance
allowance payable to employees gives employees the time and resources needed to seek new employment.
This may result in better job opportunities as employees will no longer feel compelled out of financial neces-sity to accept the first opportunity that arises. Madam
President, with this in mind, the Ministry of Economy
and Labour laid before the House of Assembly the Consultation on Retaining Local Workforce Position Paper 2024 in March of this year, which highlight ed the challenges of Bermuda’s shrinking working population. It
sought, among other initiatives, to put in place targeted
measures to encourage and motivate working- age Bermudians to remain in Bermuda, among other
measures.
Madam President, one of the initiatives initially
proposed in the position paper was an increase in severance allowance from a maximum of 26 weeks wages
to a maximum of 52 weeks wages. However, consensus received from industry and our union partners dur-ing the public consultation period was that, while an increase was necessary, the Ministry must take into con-sideration certain factors. These factors include the rising cost of doing business in Bermuda, coupled with the
fact that the purpose of this Act is to set a minimum
standard and not to include provisions that may be progressing beyond a minimum standard. As a result, support was received for an increase in severance allow-ance from a maximum of 26 weeks wages to a maximum of 32 weeks wages.
Madam President, the principal Act puts a cap
on severance allowance of 26 weeks wages, which reflects payment for a maximum of 12 continuous years
of employment. The Bill proposes to increase this ben-efit to a maximum of 32 weeks wages, benefiting those
who have been in continuous employment with an employer for 13 or more years. Madam President, pursuant to the Bill, the severance allowance for an employee with 13 years of continuous employment will
equate to 29 weeks wages. And the severance allowance f or an employee with 14 or more years of continuous employment will equate to 32 weeks wages.
Madam President, not only will this Bill
strengthen labour policies that protect the rights of
workers in Bermuda and encourage employers to engage in fair and responsible employment practices, it
will assist in persons being able to meet their basic
needs which is foundational to building a healthy and
thriving community.
Thank you, Madam President.
The President: Thank you, Senator Hodgson.
Would any Senator care to speak on this Bill?
Senator Tucker, OBA Leader in the Senate,
you have the floor.

Sen. Robin Tucker: Thank you, Madam President.
I will say that we have no issue with this Bill. I
will say that as someone who works in Human
92 11 December 202 4 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda Senate Resources who has had the unpleasant experience of
having to have these types of conversations with employees, and certainly understanding how difficult it is
for some people once they have been told that their positions are no longer required, I think that providing ad-ditional support is a good thing. I just want to reiterate
again that the additional period to a maximum of 32
weeks is not going to be for everyone. It will be for people with 13- plus years of continuous employment. Just
reiterating that.
I also want to balance that with an appreciation
for the additional —I am hesitant to use the word “burden,” but that is the most appropriate word I can think
of at the moment —that may befall some employers,
particularly small and mid -size businesses. So I would
like to know if the removal of payroll tax in conditions of
redundancy will be just for employees only or if it will be for both employee and employer?
Otherwise, I have no other questions on this
Bill. Thank you, Madam President.
The President: Thank you, Senator Tucker.
Would any other Senator care to speak on this
Bill?
Senator John Wight, you have the floor.

Sen. John Wight: Thank you, Madam President.
Obviously, this Bill will increase the cost of doing business marginally for those companies that have
an employee situation that we are looking at through
the wording of this Bill. I think that is in some ways cause for slight concern. But if there is no payroll tax
that gets paid by the employee, and certainly by the
employer, that would ease some of that additional bur-den. Under those circumstances I would be supportive
of the Bill.
Thank you, Madam President.

The President: Thank you, Senator John Wight.
Would any other Senator care to speak on this
Bill?
Hearing none, it is over to you, Senator Arianna
Hodgson. It seems you have support.

[Pause]

Sen. Arianna Hodgson: Apologies, Madam President.
I always want to make sure that I have the correct information.
So, I did just want to confirm that today the intent is to provide the relief for the employee portion of payroll tax for severance payment. I did just want to
speak to something briefly that Senator Tucker mentioned. As HR professionals and as leaders of companies, that means we are going to have to change the way we think about the employee life cycle. It means changing in terms of planning and making sure that we
have the amounts to facilitate such a move. I think it is
also worth highlighting, and we s poke to it in the other House, that the issue of severance is not always a negative thing. So, we must consider those as well.
It is also worth noting that as the world of work
changes, the labour force as it exists is going to continue to change. That means that employers are going to have to be ready to pivot when the time comes. We
are going to continue to make sure that perso ns have
the protections they need in the workplace. And I thank
those in the room for their support around this matter.
It is also interesting because I was having a
conversation about older persons receiving severance payment in some instances and then being able to have
the means to perhaps explore entrepreneurship. So,
one of an entrepreneur’s biggest challenges in Bermuda right now is the lack of cash and access to cash
to be able to advance these businesses and the plans that they have. And so I am excited that we are having more conversations about what the future world of work
looks like. We are having conversations about encouraging employers to employ older members of their
workforce for longer periods of time. So of course we
are having a lot of conversations about what that
means for changes in term of pension. That means we
are having conversations about upscalin g within the
work space.
So yes, I am 50, and I thought I was leaving the
workplace, but perhaps I do not have to. What is my
employer doing to ensure that my contribution to the
organisation is one that is welcomed by the employer ?
So, given the support on both sides, Madam
President, I would like to move that the Bill entitled the Employment Amendment Act 2024 be now read a second time.

The President: Is there any objection to the second
reading?
No objection.

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER 26

Sen. Arianna Hodgson: Thank you, Madam President.
I move that [Standing Order] 26 be suspended
in respect of this Bill.

The President: Is there any objection?
No objection.
[Motion carried: Standing Order 26 suspended.]

Sen. Arianna Hodgson: Thank you, Madam President.
I move that the Bill entitled the Employment
Amendment Act 2024 be now read a third time.

The President: Is there any objection to the third reading?
No objection.



Bermuda Senate BILL

THIRD READING

EMPLOYMENT AMENDMENT ACT 2024

Sen. Arianna Hodgson: Thank you, Madam President.
Then I move that the Bill do now pass.

The President: It has been moved that the Bill entitled
the Employment Amendment Act 2024 do now pass.
Is there any objection?
No objection. The Bill is passed.

[Motion carried: The Employment Amendment Act
2024 was read a third time and passed.]

The President: Thank you, Senator Hodgson. And
thank you, all Senators, for your support of the Bill.

Sen. Arianna Hodgson: Thank you, Madam President.

The President: We are moving on then.

MOTIONS

The President: There are none.

CONGRATULATORY AND/OR
OBITUARY SPEECHES
The President: Would any Senator care to speak at
this time?
Senator De Couto, you have the floor.

Thank you, Madam President.
First, I just want to send out my condolences to
the family of Keith Tacklyn, who has recently passed
away. I worked with Keith for many years at Renais-sance Reinsurance. He was a gentleman who always
had a smile, was friendly. I really enjoyed chatting w ith
him. Even though he may have had some various
health issues, whatever, he had the sun shining
through. I am pretty sad to hear the news, and obviously my deepest condolences to his family.
With congratulations, the Bermuda Optimist
[Dinghy Association] sailing team is competing at the
2024 Optimist World Championships in Argentina.
They are down there in their shorts and T -shirts. So, I
want to wish them great success, all five of them.
And I would like to congratulate some promotions at the Bermuda Regiment: Second Lieutenants
[S. C]. Helberg and [T. N.] Lowe on their recent promotions, and Captains [C. S.] Matvey and [S. E.] Fox III on their recent promotions. I would like to congratulate on
those well -earned promotions.
Thank you, Madam President.

The President: Thank you, Senator De Couto.
Would any other Senator care to speak?
Senator Tucker, you have the floor.
Sen. Robin Tucker: Thank you, Madam President.
I just want to offer condolences to the family of
Noel Browne. Noel went to my church. I know both him and his wife. He, like Doug just mentioned about the
individual whom he knows, anybody who knew Noel
can attest to the fact that he was always smiling, always
pleasant. I have never heard him say . . . I have travelled with Noel and his wife, and I have never heard him say an unkind word about anyone. He passed
away suddenly. A very, very sad day. So I just wanted
to offer condolences to his wife Angela, and to his
daughter Semora, and to his son Tyahn.
Thank you, Madam President.
The President: Thank you, Senator Tucker.
Senator John Wight, you have the floor.
Sen. John Wight: Thank you, Madam President.
I would like to provide condolences to the family of Albert Dale. Albert’s daughter Brenda worked with
[me] for many years at BF&M. She still works there as
an Assistant Vice President. She has been involved in
the Bermuda Olympic Association for many, many years. So I just want to provide condolences to her family.
Thank you, Madam President.

The President: Thank you, Senator Wight.
Would any other Senator care to speak?
Senator Arianna Hodgson, you have the floor.

Sen. Arianna Hodgson: Madam President, I just
wanted to speak briefly. The Progressive Labour Party Warwick Branch actually held a Christmas celebration.
And it was well attended. We had the PHC Majorettes
and Drum Corps. We had Ms. [Nikia] Manders’ dance group, the Bermuda Dance Academy. And we also
had, of course, the Gombey Warriors, the Gombeys.
And it was just a nice time to come together. Every year
the event has grown. And I would like to see the continued growth in this next year.
As persons would know, I am the newly
adopted candidate for constituency 25. And so I have
already been able to get out there and start talking to
persons. And I am looking forward to connecting with
more members particularly over the holiday season. So
I just want to celebrate the Warwick Branch’s efforts to
bring some Christmas cheer.
I also thought of the work celebrating ACCOR.
They had their Christmas party, and it was well attended. So it was nice to see a roomful of Black
94 11 December 202 4 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda Senate Bermudian professionals. And I was glad to be a part
of the celebration.
The President: Thank you, Senator Arianna Hodgson.
Senator Lindsay Simmons, you have the floor.

Sen. Lindsay Simmons: Thank you, Madam President.
Madam President, I was not able to attend the
City Christmas Boat Parade on Saturday. But I was
able to see it through the eyes of my daughter and my three- month- old nephew. It was spectacular just seeing
the pictures and seeing the children and everybody enjoying the boat parade. It was amazing. So thank you
to the City of Hamilt on for putting that on. And thank
you for people participating. I know that they did have a shout -out for people to come out and join. So, thank
you for everybody who participated in the boat parade
this year.
Thank you, Madam President.

The President: Thank you, Senator Lindsay Simmons.
Would any other Senator care to speak?
Hearing none, then we move on.
Minister Darrell.

ADJOURNMENT

Sen. the Hon. Owen Darrell: Thank you, Madam President.
Madam President, I now do ask that the Senate do adjourn until next week, Wednesday, December 18.

The President: Thank you, Minister Darrell.
Would any Senator care to speak on the motion to adjourn?
Yes, Senator Mischa Fubler. You have the
floor.

MAIDEN SPEECH

SUCCESS AND SUCCESSION:
TRAVELLING THE PATH TO PROGRESS

Sen. Mischa Fubler: Thank you, Madam President.
And hello again to my Senate colleagues and the people of Bermuda. I think this is going to go down as my
maiden speech. So it is with great anticipation and
some trepidation that I commence my navigation of the halls of our Legislature.
So, as we are moving to adjourn, and in light of
the recent rollouts of political candidates including our colleagues, Senator Arianna Hodgson and Shomari
Talbot -Woolridge, I thought I would take my time to
share my thoughts on success, the importance of s uccession planning and progress. So the title of this
speech is Success and Succession: Travelling the Path
to Progress. And to begin I want to pose a question to my
Senate colleagues and the listening public at large:
What is success? What does it look like to you when
you have attained it? How do you visualise success on
a personal level? What does it look like to you whe n
someone is successful?
Madam President, I would like to offer a definition from the Cambridge Dictionary . They offer a few,
and two of them include (1) “the achieving of the results
wanted or hoped for”; and (2) “something that achieves
positive results.” And so today I would like us to con-template how these definitions manifest in our inner vision and as we successively increase the applied
scope. And just for some greater detail there, I want you
to picture your camera zoomed in to the maximum level. Just you. If you would draw a circle around yourself, and then we will successively zoom out to encompass your family, your neighbourhood and your nation.
So, on a personal level, if you would draw a
small circle around yourself, what does success at that
scale look like? Just for you inside that circle? How
would you describe it? Do you have a comfortable tem-perature? Not being too hungry or tired, being s ituated
in a safe place or space, experiencing excellent health, not having to worry about how the bills will be paid to-day? Are we retirement -funded tomorrow? Does your
imagery change at all as you expand the scale of the circle to also enclose your famil y? And in this case, by
“family” I am referring to genetic groupings as well as
groupings of social happenstance, you know, the
friends and adopted family made along the way. And in this case, success is being a good companion, protector or provider, enjoy ing meaningful connections while
both providing and receiving support to and from others. What about the opportunity for communal recreational activity?
Finally, I want to elevate the scale of our circles
of success to encompass successively larger swathes
of our tiny Island home. Kind of observe in your mind’s
eye how the attributes and objects of your definition of
success change. Start at your neighbour hood or your
parish or the country as a whole. And while we are all
individuals and thus we certainly have variations in our
visualisations of success, we hopefully also share many similar characteristics, too. I am sure all of us describe some combination of attributes and objects that
can be categorised within Maslow’s Hierarchy of
Needs.
Even if your envisioning of success makes no
mention of attributes like sound health, meaningful and rewarding work, et cetera, or objects like housing and
wealth and other status symbols directly tied to
Maslow’s model, their existence is undoubtedly impl ied
in your visualisation, I am sure. Interestingly enough,
while I was researching for this piece, I came across a
claim published by Scientific American that neither the
author’s . . . neither Maslow’s original article, entitled “A
Theory of Human Motiva tion,” nor the subsequent 1954
book, Motivation and Personality, coined the pyramid


Bermuda Senate that is now synonymous with Maslow’s hierarchy of
needs and motivational guide. I make note of this
anomaly only to highlight that commonly held beliefs
may actually be divorced from the truth or at best represent a distorted re- creation of it.
So back to Maslow’s hierarchy and the ultimate
destination of my speech today. I think it is imperative
that we continue to expand the scope of our definition
of “success” and strive to facilitate the opportunity of
the highest stratum of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs to
be realised by the widest feasible collection of our res-idents. National self -actualisation should be the goal,
the act of pursuing positive things that enhance and esteem our sense of love and belonging for us as a nation. As a nation that i s the size of many small townships, with the GDP rivalling in both real and relative terms, nation states many times our own, we have the rather rare opportunity to implement national -level policy changes [with] effects we can begin to see within a
single political term or two. This is contrasted of course
with much larger, more complex government structures
being able to accurately measure the effects of policy,
let alone implement it, can take decades. We can realise our success on the timescale of decades, not generations.
For me, success is not having to worry about
realising Maslow’s first three levels of his needs hierar-chy—the psychological, safety, love and belonging.
Pulling some more quotes here, according to Pele, my
internationally renowned footballer, “ Success is no accident. It is hard work, perseverance, learning, studying, sacrifice and most of all, love of what you are doing
or learning to do. ” We must be intentional in engendering these tenets of success not just on a personal level,
but within our family, neig hbourhood and nation.
We can do this by participating in society via
contributing our unique skills and experience to our community. This is one of the driving forces behind my
decision to join the political discourse of our country. It
is why I am intentional in my mentorship and engagement with my community. It is why we should all be in-tentional about our work to ensure the perseverance of
our community organisations, specifically through conscientious succession planning, by selflessly contrib-uting to ensure that a successiv e generation is being
prepared to carry on the work. Our institutions that need
to remain must be deliberate in the preparation of and
for our future.
This persistence must not extend to the systems and processes of the organisation, but instead only the mission and vision. How the goals are attained
will need to change over time as circumstances
change. But the “why” we do those things must be the
guidi ng light. Real and sustained success is predicated
on a relentless pursuit of progress, its success via living the mantra of continuous improvement.
That which remains stagnant is doomed to
wither away. Following the path to progress requires a
change in our desire for things the way they were. We experience time linearly. There is no going back. While
we may in certain situations [have to] reference and
synthesise from what has historically been something
that achieves positive results, we will never be able to
replicate the conditions that resulted in success the last time and must adapt to our current circumstances.
We must acknowledge that progress is a journey, not the destination, and engage wholeheartedly in it if we want to make it a reality. We are presented with
several opportunities for pursuing progress over the
next three to five years, including implementing tax re-form such as the corporate income tax, physical presence of global tech staples like Google joining the commercial space of our Island and the integrated resource
plan goals that target a significant shift into renewable
energy. Positively trending economic indicators notwithstanding, out on the doorsteps are still too many of
us sharing how the future appears bleak to them and
that the progress that we as a nation are currently experiencing is leaving them behind.
The GDP growth and increasing international
business jobs are definitely promising measures of success. But I propose that we expand our methodologies
to better measure how far we have come and how
much further we have to go to ensure that success is
realised by more of us. To that end, I will be advocating
for the PLP to adopt this change as a platform position:
the OECD’s [Organisation for Economic Co- operation
and Development] better life index presents one option
of measures that better capture our well -being.
Just to quote, the OECD has identified 11 topics as essential to well -being in terms of material living
conditions, as follows:
1. housing;
2. income;
3. jobs;
4. quality of life [encompassed by] community;
5. education;
6. environment;
7. [civic engagement characterised as] govern-ment;
8. health;
9. life satisfaction;
10. safety; and
11. work –life balance.
I particularly like how the index’s rankings are
dependent on how we prioritise the various characteristics. And I recommend investigating the index for
yourself. OECD has a website. It is interactive; you can move the slide as is to get a feel for how you would best
prioritise those 11 topics in their Better Life Index. And achieving success for ourselves and others is attainable if we commit to collaborating to move our jewel of
the ocean along the path to progress, capturing success along the way.
And with that, thank you, Madam President.

The President: Thank you very much for your Maiden
Speech.
96 11 December 202 4 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda Senate Would any other . . .
Oh, who is that? (I beg your pardon.)

ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE PRESIDENT

SENATE VISITOR

The President: I would just like to acknowledge MP
Jason Wade in the Gallery.
(Sorry, I did not recognise you.)

ADJOURNMENT

[Continuation thereof]

The President: Would any other Senator care to
speak?
Senator Robinson, you have the floor.

NATIONAL VIOLENCE REDUCTION STRATEGY
GOAL NUMBER 4

Sen. Dwayne Robinson: Thank you, Madam President.
And before I start, I just would like to take this
opportunity to congratulate my new colleague and future polling station buddy on his Maiden Speech. And I
agree with the need for succession planning and his
call for more young people to enter the political arena
and to just be more politically involved in general.
So really briefly, I wanted to bring to the attention [of Senators] the fact that we have had a violence reduction plan that has come out. And I wanted to not
only share my support for it, but also to lend just one
concern that I have with it, constructively hopefully, as
taken on board. There is a portion of that plan that I am
very happy to see in there, and it is goal 4, which is to
promote re- integration and restoration. I think this is a
very important goal, and I am happy to see it listed in
the Gover nment’s plan, because a lot of times we look
at the cycle of violence as simply somebody does a
crime or what -not, they go to prison and that is it. And I
think a lot of times we miss the part [where] this person serves their time and they re- enter society . How does
that work? How do we crack down on folks who are in
positions where they almost . . . some people re- offend,
not necessarily because they want to, but because they
cannot escape their surroundings? I do think it is very
crucial and very lofty for Government to include this.
And I support it and what is stated inside of it.
But my concern was piqued when recently we
saw from the union of prison officers that they are 110 officers short. And this is something that is concerning for many of us in the community, but for me specifically
when it comes to this crucial part of the c rime reduction
strategy and also a crucial pillar of our society. You
have heard in another place that several of my colleagues have raised (and I did in the Budget [Debate]
as well) the inconsistency with programmes offered in the prison for inmates, and also the accessibility issues
and staffing issues, and also overall infrastructure of the prison being raised. And often it is pushback from
Government Members in another place on this particular issue.
And now that we have a head of a union coming out and basically confirming that they are indeed
short and have issues with programmes, I just wanted
to highlight that this is something that I hope is on the
very top of Government’s agenda to address. Because
it is not enough for us to simply look to prevent violence. It is not enough for us to simply hope to crack down on
existing people who may be doing antisocial behaviour.
But it is also about, How do we reform them? How do
we give them options to change , to leave?
I think on the goal part, the Opposition the Government and most of the community align. I see it in their goals listed in their strategy that most of us agree
with. I would say almost all of us actually agree with
these goals. But if we are not careful to take into account the actual state of the entities and various organisations that are going to be completing these goals,
then we are setting ourselves up for failure. Right? So
I do see that a recruitment drive has been posted. And
I look forward to seei ng the results of that. But I believe
that there is a lot more that needs to be done to support our prisons. And I look forward to seeing . . .
I just wanted to highlight my concern and hope
that Government is looking to address this very serious
thing and has taken into account the shortages. Because we are not going to be able to rehabilitate or provide proper services to folks who are looking t o change
their circumstances and also to re- integrate the society
after serving their time if our prison officers are not fully staffed, safe and able to work effectively.
Thank you, Madam President.

The President: Thank you, Senator Robinson.
Would any other Senator —
Senator Tucker, OBA Leader in the Senate,
you have the floor.

CONCERN OVER GROWING NUMBER
OF STAFF SHORTAGES

Sen. Robin Tucker: Thank you, Madam President.
Interestingly, I am going to be very much in a
similar vein as Senator Robinson. But I will be more
seedy than he was.

[Laughter]

Sen. Robin Tucker: I actually just wanted to highlight
something that is causing me quite a bit of concern.
And that is as it relates to general staff shortages. I
think it was put in the media on Sunday that the Urgent Care Centre was closed for services because they did
not have sufficient staff. We already know that the police service does not have sufficient numbers. Senator


Bermuda Senate Robinson just mentioned Corrections does not have
sufficient numbers. We saw earlier this year, around
May or so, that there was an issue with substitute
teachers, not sufficient numbers. And then of course
around the same time, I believe, there were repor ts
about insufficient numbers of lifeguards. So that concerns me. Because the growing number of staff shortages is a problem for all of us.
Now, one of the things that we have to be mindful of is the fact that, although people are working short,
a lot of people are doing a lot of overtime. They are making some pretty good money. I know that there are
some who are happy to do so. But I also kn ow there
are some who are happy to do so [but] not for long and
extended and never -ending periods of time.
Now, one of the other things that we also have
to consider is the impact on the services that are pro-vided by these very critical groups that are functioning
short. And so it is the services. Are we seeing a reduction of services? Yes, we are. Are we cons idering the
impact that these staff shortages are having on the
workers who are in these places who have to cover additional shifts? They have to cover additional roles. I
mean, we have heard it. You know, the teachers are
saying that the substitutes who w ould have provided
certain services because there are not enough so the
teachers are having to cover and things like that.
And we also have to consider the impact that
this is having, these shortages are having, on those
particular workers, so on the morale within these places
because that impacts what happens to everybody else whom they work with. The mental health, the stress that
is caused by having to overwork and all of the things
that go along with that. The quality of care. I mean, in health care, diminishing quality of care. Because everyone has a limit and everyone can only produce up to that certain limit that they a re able to do.
And so the alarm bells have already been rung.
But I just do not want us to lose sight of the fact that we have these critical shortages, and I want to sort of understand, Why are we experiencing this? So we have
these shortages, but yet we also have decr eased unemployment rates. So is there no overlap between those two so that those two things sort of balance out?
So I simply wanted to take my few moments,
just a few moments. And I am not pointing blame at anybody. I am not doing any of that. All I am saying is that
we need to be very watchful of how these shortages
are impacting everyone in this community and what is
being done to make sure that those numbers are increased going forward. Because again the impacts of
the community are great, and not only to the community
but the workers as well. And we have to be very mindful
of that.
So thank you, Madam President.
The President: Thank you, Senator Tucker.
Would any other Senator care to speak on the
motion to adjourn? Attorney General, Minister Wilkerson, you
have the floor. Attorney General.

NATIONAL VIOLENCE REDUCTION STRATEGY
GOAL NUMBER 4

Sen. the Hon. Kim Wilkerson: Thank you very much,
Madam President.
I will take just a few moments on the motion to
adjourn. I think we agreed that once our colleague had
his maiden speech, we would be quiet. But I believe my colleague across the aisle, Senator Robinson, raised
some questions which are directly in my bail iwick. So, I
thought I would take the opportunity to very briefly answer them.
First, he referred to the National Violence Reduction Strategy and goal number 4. I would like to
posit, Madam President, having spoken with the Senate Leader, that the National Violence Reduction Strategy, which was laid in another place, will be laid here.
And we would eventually debate it, in the new year perhaps. Not yet. That is the intention. That is the intention.
So there will be an opportunity for a more fulsome conversation about the strategy, which I believe is in the
works. My colleague suggest s it should happen.
But I wanted to answer this specific question in
relation to Corrections and Corrections officers and the drive (I should say) and recognition that certainly there
are vacancies. I arrived in my role, and my first budget
meeting I recognised the significant amount of overtime
in that line item. And it is because it is very difficult to
attract Bermudians to the prison service as a career.
So what I will say is, to that end, the question
was, What efforts are being made? And I take this opportunity, I did it earlier this morning in a radio interview.
But for those in the listening public, to know you could
encourage people in your families to attend an information session tomorrow evening at 6:00 pm at the
Bermuda College where the Department of Corrections
will be highlighting the career opportunities in the field
as part of our recruitment drive. So there is an overall
recruitment drive ar ound uniformed services, but this
session will be specific to Corrections opportunities for careers in the prison.
And people should recognise that it could be a
very good career. But at the same time, I have met with
the Prison Officers Association, the leadership team,
with the management teams from Corrections. And we
have had very recently conversations around the challenges there. And this recruitment drive arises from
those conversations. We recognise that if people are,
to Senator Tucker’s point, although talking about different professions, but if people are working overtime on
a consistent basis, that is indee d a recipe for disaster.
People cannot be as alert as they could be. People will be tired. There are mental health challenges around
that, physical challenges. We recognise that, and we
are having those conversations at the very moment
with the Prison Offi cers Association and with the
98 11 December 202 4 Official Hansard Report

Bermuda Senate management of Corrections to try to bring resolution to
those issues.
But as I have said before, Madam President,
the way that you eat an elephant is one bite at a time.
And we have started on dicing the elephant in order to resolve this problem. So members of the public should
stay tuned. And if there are questions, they c ertainly
can put them to the Commissioner of Corrections,
Keeva Joell -Benjamin. But people should come out tomorrow night, are encouraged. Parents who have col-lege-aged children or even high school graduates who
are unemployed, there will be opportunities to hear how
they could convert to a career in the prisons.
Thank you, Madam President.

The President: Thank you, Madam Attorney General,
Minister Wilkerson.
Would any other Senator care to speak on the
motion to adjourn?
Hearing none, Senators, the Senate stands adjourned until next week, the 18
th of December. Thank
you all.

[At 12:5 7 pm, the Senate stood adjourned until
10:00 am, Wednesday, 18 December 2024.]