Two years after the Land Title Registry office was set up, Government has yet to pass a law to allow it to function properly.

This year more than $1 million will be spent on running the office, according to the Budget book, but staff can only work on logging Government land, not private property.

Legislation was promised in 2007 by then Works and Engineering Minister Dennis Lister after the office was set up in the spring of that year.

Government said then that the Land Title Register will create a definitive record of ownership so it will no longer be necessary to undertake lengthy investigation of title each time a property is sold or mortgaged.

And it's claimed it will reduce the likelihood of disputes concerning ownership.

Government failed to answer questions from this newspaper about the delay in passing the Land Title Registry law.

Opposition Works and Engineering spokeswoman Patricia Gordon-Pamplin blasted Government for not following through.

She said the Land Title Registry was a laudable objective which would help ensure clear title to property and help resolve boundary and ownership disputes.

But she added: "What is unfortunate is that once again, the legislation to ensure effective and smooth running of the Registry is not in place.

"At present, Government buildings are listed but this pales in significance when related to the total land holdings.

"Maybe just once, Government will undertake to execute an entire plan rather than continuing their scattershot approach to projects especially when this initiative has cross-party support."

Realtors are thought to back the initiative which should make transactions easier and cheaper for the client but lawyers specialising in land transfers are not so keen.

Property lawyer Kevin George, a partner at Moniz and George, fears Government are moving to a looser, English system of recording land which won't help sort out who owns what in border disputes.

He said the English system did not record precise measurements of boundaries but just had a diagram of land rather than the details needed in Bermuda where land was scarcer.

And he added: "Land is too important to be left to Government."

He said the small part Government played in land matters was already a problem with Planning usually taking the maximum time to pronounce on whether houses were lawful.

He said finding whether financial judgements were held against people selling property was difficult because there was no computerised system at the Supreme Court Registry.

The Registrar General keeps records on the land transfers and mortgages held on land but Mr. George said their system was antiquated too as records are again kept in books rather than being computerised.

Mr. George said: "What is needed is for the problems in our existing system to be addressed rather than the wholesale introduction of a system designed for another country not for Bermuda."