The Constitution of Bermuda was enacted by Order in Council by Section 1(1) of the Bermuda Constitution Act 1967. It can only be amended by an Order in Council. There is no provision for its amendment by the Legislature in Bermuda. There have been several amendments to the original Constitution since it came into force on 21st February 1968. The Legislature of Bermuda is comprised of three elements:-

(i) Her Majesty The Queen

(ii)The Senate

(iii) The House of Assembly

The Senate consists of 11 appointed members. The House of Assembly is elected. It consists of 40 members, 2 from each of 20 constituencies. Those 20 constituencies are created out of the 9 parishes into which Bermuda has been divided since 1617. In December 2000 the Government of Bermuda asked Her Majesty in Council to enact a number of changes to the 1968 Constitution. Those changes included the amendment of Section 52 so as to provide for single member constituencies. Bermuda was to be divided into not less than 20 nor more than 40 constituencies as recommended by the Constituency Boundaries Commission appointed after the changes came into effect.

2. The Constitution of Bermuda provides in Section 53 that a Constituency B oundaries Commission for Bermuda shall be appointed from time to time at such time as the Governor, after consultation with the Premier and the Opposition Leader, may determine but not less than three nor more than seven years from the date on which the previous Commission submitted its report in accordance with the provisions of Section 54 of the Constitution.

3. The previous Commission submitted its report in accordance with Section 54 of the Constitution on 30th June, 1995.

4. The following persons were appointed by the Governor, His Excellency Mr. Thorold Masefield, CMG, under the provisions of Section 53 of the Constitution, on 5th November, 2001, to constitute a Constituency Boundaries Commission for Bermuda:-

Sir Frank Blackman, KA, KCVO, OBE, to be Chairman

The Honourable Sir Brian Smedley, to be the Judicial member

The Honourable C. Eugene Cox, JP, MP

The Honourable Dame Lois M. Browne-Evans, DBE, JP, MP (Appointed on the advice of the Premier)

The Honourable Pamela F. Gordon, JP, MP Mr. John Barritt, JP, MP (appointed on theadvice of the Opposition Leader)

5. By the provisions of Sections 2(2) of the Bermuda Constitution (Amendment) Order 2001, made at the Court at Buckingham Palace on the 18th day of July, 2001, and brought into force on 21st August, 2001 (Statutory Instrument 2001 No. 2579), the Commission was mandated as follows:

To prepare and submit to the Governor a report recommending the number, being no fewer than twenty nor greater than forty, and boundaries of constituencies into which Bermuda should be divided with a view to each such constituency returning one member to the House of Assembly.

6. By Section 2(3) of the said Order, the Commission was further mandated that in preparing its report, it must ensure that the constituencies shall contain, so far as is reasonably practicable, equal numbers of persons qualified to be registered as electors under Section 55 of the Constitution as amended by the Order 2001, (Statutory Instrument 2001 No. 2579); and in doing so -

to take no account of the racial distribution of electors within Bermuda;

to take account of geographical features and natural boundaries within Bermuda;

it may ignore the boundaries of parishes; and

it must ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that each constituency is a contiguous unit.

7. The Commission was required by Section 2(4) of the Order, for the purpose of the discharge of its function, to invite views from members of the public; and it was authorised to seek such advice as it considered appropriate.

By Section 53 of the Constitution under which the Commission is appointed, the

Commission is authorised:-

to regulate its own procedure and, with the consent of the Governor, to confer powers and impose duties on any public officer or on any authority of the Government for the purpose of the discharge of its functions;

to determine any question before it by the vote of a majority of the members present and voting, with the Chairman having and exercising a casting vote in the event of an equality of votes.

9. Section 53(8) of the Constitution provides that the Commission shall not be subject to the direction or control of any other person or authority.

10. Before the coming into force of the Constitution (Amendment) Order 2001 on 21st August 2001, Section 54 of the Constitution required, inter alia, a Constituency Boundaries Commission to submit its report (on whether changes in the boundaries of constituencies should be made and what, if any, those changes should be) to the House of Assembly. Then, under the provisions of subsection (3) of that Section, the Premier was required to lay before the House of Assembly for its approval the draft of an order by the Governor for giving effect, with of without modifications, to the recommendations contained in the Commission's report. The Premier's draft could have made provision for any matters which appeared to the Premier to be incidental to or consequential upon the other provisions of the draft.

11. As indicated in paragraph 5 above, the new Amendment Order of 21st August, 2001, has changed this procedure. The Commission's report is now required to be submitted to theGovernor and then, by virtue of Section 2(5) of the new Order, the Governor is required to transmit to the Secretary of State the report together with the record of any debate in the House of Assembly on that report, including any motion approved by the House in relation to the report.

12. Section 52 of the Constitution, which has not been amended by the Constitution (Amendment) Order 2001, provides for the division of the parishes of Bermuda into two-member constituencies for the purpose of elections.

13. Therefore the report of the current Constituency Boundaries Commission with recommendations in accordance with its mandate cannot be final and be put into effect only by local procedures unless the Constitution is further amended. In fact, it has been publicly stated that the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs was minded to set in train a two-stage process: the first stage being that of having a report from a Boundaries Commission based on single seat constituencies, and the second stage being consideration of the report, involving further consultation with Bermuda.

14. The Commission convened on Monday, 3rd December, 2001. It proceeded to regulate its own procedure.

Taking special note of its duty to invite views from members of the public for the

purpose of the discharge of its functions, the Commission decided that such views should be sought by holding public meetings at some locations in the island at which views would be received, as well as by receiving written submissions. Arrangements would be made for the first public meeting to be broadcast and televised live. Arrangements would also be made for the proceedings at the public meetings to be recorded and for the transcripts to be provided for each of the members of the Commission to ensure that those views were taken into consideration.

The decision about receiving views from members of the public raised the following questions:-

Inasmuch as views expressed at the public meetings would be broadcast and therefore become known to all present and all others listening to the broadcast, should the written submissions and other data received by the Commission also be made known to the general public by publication of them by the Commission before the completion of its report?

Should the Commission receive oral submissions "in camera"?

Should the Commission hold private or public hearings for persons who wished to make oral submissions?

Would the publication of submissions have the effect of appearing to be an attempt, by greater public reaction, to influence the Commission in its recommendations?

After due consideration, a majority decision was reached by the Commission that only the submissions made orally at the public meetings would be published by way of the public broadcasts or newspaper reports.

17. In its initial session of sittings, the Commission agreed that the following data should be requested from the Department of Statistics, the Parliamentary Registrar and the Ministry of Works and Engineering:-

the number of persons registered as voters by constituencies;

the number of persons qualified to be registered as voters by constituencies, and the number of persons qualified in each of the 242 census districts on which the constituencies are based;

a comparison between the census population 16 years and over (as at Census Day on 20th May, 2000) and the 2001 Parliamentary Register;

maps of the parish boundaries, the census districts, and the current constituency districts.

18. Advice was sought from the Director of Planning as to whether there were any major residential development plans that might affect the Commission's recommendations on constituency boundaries. The Commission was informed that there were no other development plans other than those which had been published according to law.

It was agreed that the holding of public meetings should commence as early as

possible in the New Year 2002.

The Commission adjourned its sessions until 28th January 2002 to allow time for

the preparation of the information sought, for arrangements for the public meetings to be made, and for preparation by the public of their views for submission to the Commission. Arrangements were made during the interval for four public meetings to be held, beginning in the City of Hamilton on 31st January 2002, then in St. George's on 6th February, in St. David's on 7th February and in Sandys on 13th February 2002.

21. On resumption of its sessions in January 2002, the Commission received some of the information previously requested and took steps to have the relevant information reproduced specifically for dissemination to the general public at the future meetings.

22. By the time of the second public meeting on 6th February, 2002, a package of information for the general public was ready and was made available at that and the two subsequent meetings and at Post Offices, the Library and the Government Information Office.

23. At each of the public meetings, maps which had been produced by the Ministry of Works and Engineering were projected on a screen and staff of that Ministry demonstrated ways in which constituency boundaries could be drawn with consideration being given to road and other boundaries and to locations of residences and other structures.

A deadline date for the submission of views by the general public was fixed at

15th March 2002. By that date, 73 submissions were made orally at the four public meetings by 60 persons. In addition to the oral submissions, 177 written submissions were received. Of these 177 written submissions, 103 were by way of responses to a questionnaire prepared and published in the newspapers by an organisation called The Association for Due Process and the Constitution. The remaining 74 submissions were made independently.

A list of the persons or organisations from whom submissions were received is recorded in Appendix 3 to this report.

26. Early in the course of its deliberations, the Commission secured the services of Professor Ron Johnston, BA, MA (manchester), Ph.D (Monash), DU (Essex), LLD (Monash), D.Litt (Sheffield), Ac. SS, FBA, a psephologist of the School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, England. Since 1980 Professor Johnston's research has largely centered on the value of a geographical perspective in the study of electoral systems. Among the main themes in the British situation on which the group of researchers under his leadership have concentrated are spatial variations in voting, the impact of local campaigns and the process of constituency definition. He has specifically been involved in work in the United Kingdom, the United States of America and New Zealand.

27. Professor Johnston stated that the question of how many Parliamentarians there should be was outside of his scope. In his view, the Commission had first to determine the number of constituencies. In drawing the boundaries of those constituencies he advised that some of the questions which the Commission needed to consider and determine were:-

what exactly is a geographical feature, e.g. is the airport a natural boundary?;

whether to use the parishes as boundaries which are historically important;

28. whether or not to use the current 242 census districts or to develop smaller, more manageable "building blocks" referred to as "polygons";

29.

30. whether or not the two constraints mentioned in (a) and (b) above should be used in order to satisfy the mandate.

31.

32. At the request of the Commission, Professor Johnston visited the Ministry of Works and Engineering and expressed to the Commission his satisfaction that the Ministry had adequate staff and equipment to carry out the work required for the Commission. The psephologist indicated agreement with the course which the Commission seemed to have been following.

34. An overwhelming majority of the submissions to the Commission as regards the number of members of the House of Assembly called for the current number of 40 to be retained. But the question arises of the amount of weight which should be attached to this public response as it is to be noted from the information given in paragraph 24 that the majority of the submissions were responses to a pro forma questionnaire prepared by one interested organisation.

35. Some of the views advocating a higher or lesser number of members include the

36. following:

No problems seem to have arisen with having had a high number, therefore "If it is not broke, why fix it?".

Because of the tendency or requirement of Bermudians to travel abroad frequently on business or otherwise, some MPs are frequently unable to give their constituents full personal representation and have to arrange for the constituency duties to be shared by their colleagues.

A larger number of MPs provides an opportunity for choice of Cabinet Ministers and Junior Ministers, an effective back bench, appointments to House Committees, and a deterrent to the formation of a small power group.

Each MP would have a manageable number of constituents.

In the absence of an effective islandwide Local Government system, the constituency representative must be concerned not only with broad national interests but also with parochial interests.

There seemed to have been concern that a reduction in the number of members of the House would have an adverse effect on parochial concerns being satisfactorily dealt with.

No significant benefit has been seen from the change from 36 to 40 members, which was made in 1968 arising from the Constitutional Conference in the United Kingdom at that time.

Business in the House of Assembly is frequently dealt with and settled with less than the current 40 members in attendance.

Having a lesser number of members was likely to persuade the Leader of the Government to appoint a Cabinet of less than the presently permitted 12 from among MPs from the House. This could result in a financial saving.

Just as the proposal to have single member constituencies instead of double member constituencies was in the election manifesto of the present Government, so too was the proposal to reduce the number of MPs.

31. Notwithstanding their call for retaining forty (40) as the number of members, many of the submissions recognized the possibility arising of a situation, as has happened in other countries, where each of two political parties contesting a General Election could win an equal number of seats. They therefore conceded that it might be preferable to have an uneven number of elected members.

32. Another view widely expressed by persons who made submissions related to the provision in the Amendment Order (S.I.2001 No. 2579) that the Commission may ignore the boundaries of parishes in its delineation of new constituencies. It seemed to have been believed that the Commission would change the parish boundaries. It was represented that if the parish boundaries were ignored, parishioners might feel a loss of their traditional parish identities and a lessening of the opportunity of having parochial matters properly attended to. This latter consideration has already been mentioned in the preceding paragraph 30. It was repeatedly explained by the Commission publicly that its mandate did not include the changing of parish boundaries but only that it may ignore any of the fixed parish boundaries if it became necessary to do so in order to achieve a practicable equality of voters in contiguous constituencies.

33. There is no doubt that the parish identity is firmly established in Bermuda culture. However, in recent years when Bermuda was divided into Postal Zones, this was done without having regard to the parish boundaries. In attempting to create new constituencies which were contiguous units with as far as practicable an equal number of electors in each constituency it became apparent that the parish boundaries had to be disregarded.

34. In the course of the public meetings and in some of the written submissions to the Commission, as well as in other public statements, the phrase was frequently used of "one manone vote of equal value". This means that the public expects that the constituencies created would result in a vote in one constituency being of equal value to the vote in another so far as is practicable.

35. This expression of view could presumably be the reason why there was also a call from sections of the public for serious consideration to be given to changing the existing electoral systems of "first past the post" to one of some form of Proportional Representation which, they seemed to believe, would better ensure a democratic form of government. The Commission repeatedly stated that such a matter was not within its authority under the Constitution (Amendment) Order of 2001.

36. Having regard to the expectation mentioned in paragraph 34 above, consideration should be given to the situation that currently exists, and that will continue to exist under the Constitution (Amendment) Order, where voters in one or other of the constituencies are denied full representation in the House of Assembly. This is occasioned by the existing provision for the election of the Speaker of the House.

37. Under current law, in Sections 32(1)(b) and 42(2) of the Constitution, the Speaker of the House is elected from among the members of the House. He presides at each sitting of the House and he is not permitted to vote unless on any question the votes are equally divided in which case he has a casting vote [see Section 44(3). This means that the member who is elected by his constituents to represent them, but is chosen by his fellow MPs to be the Speaker, does not have the same opportunity as his fellow MPs to represent his constituents by speaking on their behalf in the House. It might be said that in the situation of double member constituencies, the constituents still had recourse to the other constituency representative but there will be no such recourse possible in a situation of single member constituencies.

38. A proposal for provision for the selection of the Speaker from outside the elected members - so as to fully satisfy the call for "one man one vote of equal valuethe mostimportant thing being of equal value"found favour with a majority of members of the Commission. However, the point was made within the Commission that this matter also, as in the case previously mentioned in paragraph 35, was not in the Commission's remit and that the majority view was that it would therefore be improper to include it as a specific recommendation of the Commission.

39. Under current legislation persons qualified to be registered as voters may do so on an on-going basis but the Parliamentary Register is published as at 15th June each year. The on-going registration includes not only additions but also changes in registration and therefore the number of eligible voters and their locations as reported to the Commission will vary from time to time. The Parliamentary Register will show only the number of persons who have registered but the Commission needed to take account also of those other persons qualified to be registered.

Arising from collaboration between the Parliamentary Registrar, the Department

of Statistics, the Computer Systems & Services Department and the Ministry of Works and Engineering, the Commission was informed that the number of eligible voters for whom addresses could be identified, as at the beginning of April 2002, was 38,193, but that there were some 985 other potential voters for whom no addresses could be pinpointed at that time. As the Commission wished to be informed of the location of all eligible voters by their home addresses, it pressed the relevant Government departments to renew and continue their efforts to refine the list of eligible voters. By mid-June 2002 a complete list was available, giving the total number of eligible voters for all of whom addresses could be identified as 39,198 as at 20th May, 2002. The Commission considers it to be more appropriate, so as to avoid a repetition of the problems which beset it at the outset of its deliberations, that the Parliamentary Register should be primarily based and be maintained on the residential addresses of the voters rather than on other data.

A recommendation on the number of constituencies may be influenced by what is considered to be a desirable and manageable size of a constituency; and it is to be remembered that the Commission is required to ensure that the constituencies shall contain, as far as is reasonably practicable, equal numbers of eligible voters. Also, account has to be taken of geographical features and natural boundaries.

Statistics supplied to the Commission show that of the current 20 double-member constituencies, the smallest size is one of 1371 in a 2-constituency parish of 2760 voters, and the largest is 2720 in a 2-constituency parish of 5375 eligible voters. The view may again be posed that responsibility for representation of the voters (and other persons) in either of these or any of the other constituencies is shared between the currently two elected members but such a view can only be supported if the two members are of the same political party. In a single-member constituency situation, there will be no opportunity for such sharing.

43. To arrive at equality of numbers of eligible voters as far as is reasonably practicable, and taking into account the constraints mentioned at the end of paragraph 41 (i.e. geographical features and natural boundaries), the Commission decided to allow for a variant in the number of voters in the several constituencies. The variant was plus or minus 5% (? 5%) of the base figure, taking care to avoid as far as practicable any large number coming against a very much smaller number in contiguous constituencies. It was subsequently discovered when drawing the actual boundaries of the constituencies decided upon, that it was not possible nor practicable to contain the constituencies within the desired size without indeed using the variant of ?5% because of the natural and geographical conditions. The delineation of the boundaries had to be varied so as to avoid creating "unnatural" lines but to take account of existing roads.

The number of eligible voters being 39,198 and the number of constituencies not being allowed, by the Constitution (Amendment) Order 2001, to be fewer than twenty (20) nor greater than forty (40), the basic size of a constituency could therefore lie between 1960 and 980 eligible voters. That is to say, for 40 MPs, each constituency would have to be basically of 980 voters and for 20 MPs the number of voters would be 1960.

Having been advised of the intention of governmental authorities to reintroduce elected Parish Councils, the Commission believes that the need for a large number of MPs to deal with parochial matters - to which reference is made in paragraph 30 (A) (e) - may no longer arise. Therefore, it would seem - if this intention became a reality - that a lesser number of MPs would be adequate and, consequently, the number of voters in a constituency should be more than the 980.

In considering lesser numbers of constituencies and MPs, the results are as follows in the light of the total number of eligible voters (of 39, 198) and the application of the variant ?5%:-

39 1005 955-1055

38 1031 979-1083

37 1059 1006-1112

36 1089 1035-1143

35 1120 1064-1176

34 1153 1095-1211

33 1188 1129-1247

32 1225 1164-1286

47. Although the number of elected members will follow from the recommendation on the number of constituencies, the two issues are intertwined and call for closer attention to be placed in the first instance to the question of what would be an adequate number of members for facilitating the functioning of the Government.

Representations were made to the Commission about the number of Ministers in the Cabinet, which had some bearing on the number of MPs. The representations, on the one hand, were that all the Ministers should be appointed and paid on a full-time basis, which should enable them to devote more time to their parliamentary duties and better serve the people. This was seen as a means of reducing the need for so many of them and for so many other members of the House. On the other hand, the other faction of the representations argued that a reduction in the number of Ministers would cause each one of the lesser number to take on more responsibilities, and could provide an opportunity for increasing the power of a smaller number of persons (i.e. the smaller Cabinet) over the populace. (This latter argument was raised previously in paragraph 30 (A) (c)).

The Commission was moved to point out from time to time that there is nothing

in the current Constitution to prevent the appointment of a lesser number of Ministers than the present or recent number, nor to prevent them from being remunerated on a full-time basis; and further, that the question of the number or composition or terms of appointment of the Cabinet was not within its mandate.

For the record, it is to be noted that Section 57(1) of the Constitution prescribes

that the Premier and not less than six (6) Ministers shall constitute the Cabinet. That Section and the later Sections 58 and 64 deal with the size of the Cabinet and the composition of it. They show that the minimum number of members of the House of Assembly who may be members of the Cabinet is five (5), they being the Premier and four (4) other members; in addition, there must be not less than one (1) nor more than two (2) Senators in the Cabinet. Those Sections of the Constitution go on to show that provided that there are no Junior Ministers (duly appointed under Section 63) the maximumnumber of members of the House who may be members of the Cabinet is twelve (12), they being the Premier and eleven (11) other members of the House; in addition there must be at least one (1) but no more than two (2) Senators.

For good governance there ought to be an effective backbench from the governing party and an effective minority opposition. The experience of all the Heads of Government in the Island over the past thirty odd years seems to have been that there has been a need for a Cabinet of more than the prescribed minimum number and, in most instances for a Cabinet approaching the permissible maximum number. It is to be noted also that in 1968 when the population of the Island was much less than it currently is, and the size of Government was smaller, the principal Constitution Order of 1968 provided for a maximum of twelve (12) members from the House; and it also provided, by inference, that should there be a lesser number of Ministers from the House, that lesser number of Ministers could be assisted by the appointment of Junior Ministers. Because of their role, the Junior Ministers cannot be seen to be in the same position as the other backbenchers in the House who may be perceived as constituting a check on their Party colleagues in the Cabinet.

The Commission experienced difficulty in determining the number of constituencies and members of the House of Assembly. The Commission was required to invite views on this question from members of the public and therefore had a duty to consider and take into account their views. Views were submitted by individual members of the public and by organisations, including the two political parties which constitute the membership of the House. The Progressive Labour Party recommended a reduction to thirty-two (32) seats and the United Bermuda Party recommended thirty-nine (39) elected members plus an appointed Speaker.

53. Four of the six members of the Commission are appointed on the nomination of the leaders of the two political parties. Therefore those four members would have found themselves in the position, in the first place, of supporting, endorsing and advocating their party's view. They also had the duty of considering the other views that had been submitted. Their respective Parties did not have that opportunity or that duty.

54. Taking all the views received into consideration, the Commission arrived at a stage where the choices fell within the range of 32 - 39 constituencies as set out in paragraph 46.

55. The Commission was able to further reduce its choices. Its choices were based on logical and reasoned arguments arising out of all the views received as a whole without any particular political considerations.

The Commission was of the view that the basic size of a constituency should not simply be determined by dividing the current total number of eligible voters by the number of constituencies - whatever that number might be - but rather on what should also be considered to be a reasonable and manageable size of a constituency. Adopting this approach, the Commission was able to further reduce its choices of the number of constituencies eventually to be between 35 - 36.

In the interest of reaching unanimity within the Commission, the political members were urged by their colleagues on the Commission to see their way to discharge their duty in the best interests of the country as a whole and to agree among the four of them to one number.

The political members were unable, in the initial stages, to reach agreement among themselves.

So intense was the desire to reach unanimity on this crucial question, that it was left unresolved until the final session of sittings. This was to afford all the members of the Commission the fullest opportunity to reflect on the views, which had been expressed over the past several months both within and outside of the Commission.

The Commission is happy to report that after repeated efforts a unanimous decision was reached on the number of constituencies and members of the House of Assembly.

That decision was that there should be thirty six (36) constituencies.

Applying the polygons produced by the Ministry of Works and Engineering to this number of constituencies produced an allocation of constituencies as follows: No. of No. of

?

? 1. St. George's North 1080 19. Pembroke West 1132

? 2. St. George's West 1127 20. Pembroke South West 1145

? 3. St. David's 1112 21. Pembroke South East 1124

? 4. St. George's South 1098 22. Paget East 1137

? 5. Hamilton East 1142 23. Paget West 1081

? 6. Hamilton West 1116 24. Warwick South East 1094

? 7. Hamilton South 1111 25. Warwick North East 1067

? 8. Smiths South 1035 26. Warwick South Central 1031

? 9. Smiths West 1057 27. Warwick North Central 1060

? 10. Smiths North 1148 28. Warwick West 1093

? 11. Devonshire East 1045 29. Southampton East 1099

? 12. Devonshire South Central 1058 30. Southampton East Central 1146

? 13. Devonshire North Central 1051 31. Southampton West Central 1063

? 14. Devonshire North West 1040 32. Southampton West 1144

? 15. Pembroke East 1037 33. Sandys South 1076

? 16. Pembroke East Central 1066 34. Sandys South Central 1135

? 17. Pembroke Central 1060 35. Sandys North Central 1059

56. 18. Pembroke West Central 1049 36. Sandys North 1080

57.

58. Having regard to the views which had been expressed about maintaining parish identities, as previously mentioned in paragraphs 32 and 33, the Commission has had no option but to decide that the new constituencies should be related as closely as possible to the parishes in which, for the greater part, they physically fall, and be known and described by the number and name in the preceding paragraph 62.

60. The method used in determining the configuration of the several constituencies and their boundaries, as well as the number of voters in them, has been certified as satisfactory by Mr. Fred Hejazi, Senior Vice President of Digital Engineering Corporation of Columbia, Md., USA. Mr. Hejazi's services were obtained as a Consultant to the Commission. Digital Engineering Corporation provides technical services tailored to support clients with requirements for data conversion implementation, database design and application development in Geographic Information Systems setting. Among the solutions, which have been provided by the Corporation to Government clients world-wide is "autoBound" - redistricting and re-apportionment system: "autoBound" helps users to assign small polygon units together to create districts.

61. The polygons produced by the Ministry of Works and Engineering were based on existing roads and showed the number of potential voters from the information supplied by the Department of Statistics and the Computer Systems & Services Department. The Commission used the polygons in determining the boundaries of the constituencies with the aim of obtaining equality as far as practicable with the application of the variant of ?5%.

62. The Commission was advised by the Consultant from Digital Engineering Corporation that in projects such as this the base polygons are typically constructed from "city style" blocks, i.e. an area surrounded on each side by a road or physical feature such as a stream. The use of this type of base polygon ensures that any resulting electoral boundary created from these blocks conform to physically visible features which can easily be identified by the electorate. The process of creating the base polygon layer for this type of project involves a computer programme, which identifies closed polygons from the roads and other linear features.

63. The geometry of roads and other physical features in the Island of Bermuda required two modifications to the aforementioned process. First, beach access and/or other roads running perpendicular towards the water, do not run to the waters edge. As a result, a complete block cannot be formed in these areas. By simply applying the automated block creation, a large block encompassing the entire outer boundary of the Island would be formed. To ensure that blocks of reasonable size would be created, lines were manually added from identifiable intersections to the coast line.

64. Next, the number of road sections in the Island of Bermuda resulted in too few base polygons. As a result, balanced districts could not be created in certain parts of the Island. Moving such large blocks simply shifts the population error from one district to another. To correct this problem, lines were manually added to split these blocks. To ensure that the split blocks could be identified by the public, the splits were started and terminated at road intersections. Additionally, during the split process, the Island's aerial orthophotography was displayed in the background to ensure that the split lines would not cross buildings and run along the edges of properties. The aerial photography was also used to ensure that the location of the new lines accounted for driveways and access roads used by particular property owners.

65. Once the manual split lines had been added, the automated block building process was run and the final base polygon layer was created.

67. 70. As stated previously, the Commission's sessions commenced on 3rd December 2001. After adjournment on 8th December 2001 until 28th January 2002, the Commission reconvened on that date until 14th February 2002. The Commission again sat from 11th to 28th March and then from 22nd April until 1st May 2002. The next sitting was from 27th June until 6th July 2002, and thereafter field trips were arranged for the purpose of verifying that the boundaries proposed to be drawn met the requirements as far as practicable. The final session of sittings was from 26th to 30th August 2002. The intervals between the sessions were mainly caused by the Parliamentary timetable which affected attendance by the political members of the Commission; by overseas commitments of members; and by the need to have the statistical and graphical information with which it was being supplied updated from time to time.

68. While the sessions have been protracted, the Commission is satisfied that this enabled it to be provided with information which is as accurate as possible to meet not only current but also future needs; and the opportunity has been provided for reconciling the differing views which arose among the members of the Commission from time to time in respect of the recommendations required to be made.

71. After full and careful deliberation, the Commission recommends:-

that the number of constituencies into which Bermuda should be divided should be thirty six (36);

that the boundaries of those thirty six (36) constituencies should be as defined in the Schedule to this report and also illustrated in the map at Appendix 1;

for all purposes in the event of any dispute the governing and definitive map shall be the large map initialed by the Commissioners at Appendix 4;

that the number of elected members of the House of Assembly, each of whom should be returned by each one of the constituencies, should be thirty six (36);

73. Although unanimity was reached by the Commissioners on the recommendations set out in the preceding paragraph 72, there were other matters on which dissenting views were strongly expressed and one Commissioner specifically requested that they be recorded and included in this report. Those views are accordingly presented in Appendix 2.

74. The Commission particularly records its appreciation of the assistance rendered to it by the Heads of Departments, and their staff, of the Parliamentary Registration Office, the Department of Statistics, the Computer Systems & Services Department, the Government Information Services and the Ministry of Works and Engineering, with special mention of Miss Elizabeth Adams, Mapping Officer of that Ministry. The officers involved were pressed hard by the Commission and they responded co-operatively. We thank them all. The Commission acknowledges the contribution made by the Association for Due Process and the Constitution in stimulating public interest in the business of the Commission, and thanks all those persons and the political parties who submitted views to it.

75. The Commission also acknowledges and records its appreciation and gratitude for the services of its Recording Secretary, Mrs. Belinda Woolridge, and for the physical facilities provided for it. Special mention must be made of the Commission's Executive Secretary, Mr. Clevelyn Crichlow, substantive Post Master General, and those of this staff, who spared no effort in seeing that the requirements of the Commission were satisfactorily and promptly met.

All of which is respectfully submitted.

_____________________________ ___________________________________

Sir Frank Blackman The Hon. Sir Brian Smedley

_____________________________ ___________________________________

The Hon. C. Eugene Cox, JP, MP The Hon. Dame Lois Browne-Evans, JP, MP

_____________________________ ___________________________________

The Hon. Pamela F. Gordon, JP, MP Mr. John Barritt, JP, MP

August, 2002