Log In

Reset Password

Corporation's bad year

It is still January, but 2008 has already become an annus horribilis for the Corporation of Hamilton.

The year started badly when word leaked that it had given the Bermuda Society for the Arts, its tenant for almost half a century and the creative birthplace for many of Bermuda's leading artists, its walking papers.

After a wave of public protest from all walks of life, the Corporation, which said it needed the BSoA's gallery for office space, extended the gallery's lease until the end of the year, which at least provides some breathing space for a solution to the stand-off to be found.

That protest was followed by a walkout by Corporation of Hamilton workers, apparently over the Corporation's desire to direct deposit its employees pay, which sounded like a good idea. Apparently, some workers had not gotten around to setting up their accounts, did not get paid, and walked off the job.

A second walkout, this time over the dismissal of two workers, followed and Hamilton looked set for a siege.

Overshadowing the actual dispute was the question of union representation. A ballot took place a year ago in which the union received a majority of the ballots case, although not a majority of the Corporation's employees. The Bermuda Industrial Union claimed this mean it should be the bargaining agent, the Corporation said no and took the matter to court, where it has been waiting for a hearing ever since.

Now, with the threat of more widespread action allegedly hanging over the Corporation, the City fathers acceded to the union's demands for recognition, and the Corporation's workers are now unionised. Certainly, the Corporation said it was arguing against the legality of the ballot on principle, but evidently, principle had too high a price in this case. The employees were also reinstated.

The Corporation must surely have known what a public relations fiasco the eviction of the BSoA from its gallery was going to be, but it has had another unforeseen consequence as well.

It is a longstanding matter of record that the Progressive Labour Party dislikes the tax roll-based franchise of the Corporations of Hamilton and St. George's, and a dispute in the last Corporation mayoral election over the register will only have added to this concern.

The Corporation, in spite of attempts to widen the register under late Mayor Jay Bluck, is based on a property vote and some residents of Hamilton who are not taxpayers are disenfranchised.

The problem is whether landowners should be disenfranchised in the event that the voters register is changed to include all residents. The bulk of the Corporation's land tax revenue comes from businesses and commercial real estate owners while a much smaller part comes from actual residents. Shouldn't the people who pay most of the taxes have a say in how the money is spent?

Finding a balance in which taxpayers and residents share in the franchise is a difficult, but by no means impossible, problem. It is also likely that the Government has had more pressing concerns, and the Corporation has been, for the most part, well run since 1998.

But the fact is that the Corporations exists at the pleasure of the Government, and cannot afford to make many errors. The BSoA decision was a major one. At the same time, this newspaper has long sought access to the Corporation meetings and has always been rebuffed.

Promises to provide minutes of meetings have gone unfulfilled, and the recent BSoA decision – in which it is impossible to find out how the different Aldermen and Councillors voted — is a classic example of how the Corporation operates without public accountability. It is not good enough.

The members of the Corporation have to see that their civic responsibilities extend beyond dollars and cents and that they need to operate with greater transparency and in a way that is more accountable to a broader public than the limited number of people who elect them.

If they fail to recognise that and act accordingly, they might just find themselves out of a job, and that would be too bad, because the Corporation has mostly been a force for good for a good many years now.