Royal Gazette records dating back to the early 1990s show the first call for Government transparency came from Progressive Labour Party stalwart Eva Hodgson in 1992.

As in many jurisdictions, it was another five years or so before accountability and transparency became buzzwords consistently demanded of Government, according to our archives.

Since then, the Opposition — be it the PLP or the United Bermuda Party — has complained time and again about the public being left in the dark on key issues.

This is how debate has toed and froed over the past decade and a half:

June 1992: In a Mid-Ocean News opinion piece about sustainable development, Dr. Hodgson bemoans how the UBP Government had left major groups out of the decision-making process as Bermuda "indulged in overdevelopment".

Dr. Hodgson wrote: "The Bermuda Government has not always seemed to recognise that implementing any successful action plan towards environmentally sound and sustainable development will require greater popular participation.

"A coordinated, participatory approach to policy development, combined with greater transparency and accountability, would assure more successful and well-considered decision making."

May 1997: A joint committee is set up to introduce a registry of MPs interests. UBP backbencher Trevor Moniz, who chairs the committee, points to the growing relevance of transparency in modern day politics.

November 1997: In her reply to the Throne Speech, PLP leader Jennifer Smith demands to be told what has happened to cash which was supposed to fund the new National Stadium.

"Bermudians have a right to expect as much financial accountability from Government as Government expects from sports organisations. Right now, the National Stadium is a National Shame," states the future Premier.

November 1998: Following several years of accusing the UBP of arrogance and a lack of accountability to the people, the PLP pledges in its election manifesto: "Accountability and transparency will be the underlying credo for the priorities, principles and policies of a PLP Government."

The PLP sweeps to power in a historic General Election.

May 1999: It's the UBP's turn to accuse the PLP of a lack of transparency, as the new Government refuses to reveal information on a string of public issues, including how much taxpayers' money has been spent on an aborted Government TV show. Over the next four years, the UBP continues to claim the PLP is not living up to its promise of transparency.

July 2003: The UBP's election manifesto includes a good governance plan, promising a freedom of information act, code of conduct of parliamentarians and whistleblowers act. However, the PLP wins at the polls again, after promising to build a country where Government "continues to operate in the sunshine of public scrutiny".

April 2004: Premier Alex Scott ups the ante by commissioning research into what kind of access the public should be given to Government information.

July 2005: Mr. Scott releases a discussion paper titled Public Access To Information (PATI), to underline his commitment to good governance and transparency. He proposes as much information as possible is made accessible unless its disclosure causes harm — and even then it can be disclosed if in the public interest.

November 2005: The UBP complains that implementation of Mr. Scott's PATI legislation will not happen until at least 2007, and that access to information won't be available before 2010.

December 2005: Mr. Scott tells MPs: "Government has not been seen to be as open as the public wants. It was once hard to find, get and share information but that is all about to come to an end. We will now work to open up Government."

July 2006: Three and a half months before he is replaced by Ewart Brown as Premier, Mr. Scott reiterates his pledge to put the PATI law in place in 2007.

December 2007: Mr. Scott's plans for PATI legislation by 2007 bite the dust and there is no mention of the bill in the PLP's election manifesto. When pressed by The Royal Gazette in the run-up to the election, Dr. Brown pledges PATI will be "kept in play". The UBP's failed election bid had included a promise to "guarantee public access to public information" by implementing straightaway a freedom of information act and other legislation such as a whistleblower act.