Bringing in a mechanism for a public access to information right for Bermuda will cost between $4 million and $6 million for the initial five years of the project.

But that is the price you have to pay for a quality service, saidas he brought a take note motion on a Public Access to Information (PATI) Discussion Paper to the House of Assembly

"Government has not been seen to be as open as the public wants," said Mr Scott. "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."

PATI would provide more openness and transparency in Government, he said, adding: "Information will go from a 'need to know' basis to a 'right to know' basis."

It may sound like a simple task to open up the Government archives to the public, he said, however the ability to retrieve, organise and separate information that was still too sensitive from the rest required the experience of others, he said.

As a result a special team from the Central Policy Unit (CPU) had spent seven months researching PATI both locally and overseas.

"Freedom of information is bringing Bermuda into the future," he said. "The quality of information is a conduit to making either good or bad decisions."

The Premier said the first phase of PATI would commence in 2006.

PATI would be fully implemented in five years, he said, however, the public would start to see results in three years.

"CPU will take the lead and start as urgently as possible," he said. "They will draw up a more detailed strategic plan. CPU will use the discussion paper as a blueprint." He said PATI also had the ability to override prohibitive legislation that currently restricted public access to information.

"Government is not in a position to supply full access to information immediately but that is because we do not have the systems to comply with PATI," he said. "Individuals will be able to protect themselves should they feel at risk."

The cost of between $4 million and $6 million is necessary, according to the Premier, who said: "Services cost money and to do it properly the investment must be sensible and appropriate."

Mr. Scott also noted it was important to reassure the public that their personal information will not be breached by civil servants and he said the proposals had drawn from the best aspects used by other countries and avoiding their failings and pitfalls, and he gave a reassurance that there would public consultation before anything is passed law.

The Premier announced that public access to information would be overseen by an independent commissioner and there would be a further mechanism of an independent appeals tribunal.

He concluded: "Secrecy has characterised governments around the world and governments in Bermuda have been no exception. Through this discussion paper the Government proposes a regime of openness that creates a transparent and accountable Government. The intention is to create a number of benefits for the people and the Government of Bermuda." welcomed the discussion paper and said a freedom of information act was something the United Bermuda Party had proposed at the last election.

But he warned it should not be an Alice in Wonderland, or indeed an Alex in Wonderland, exercise but something that can be judged by words being turned into action. He said: "Is this for show or is it for real?"

Mr. Barritt referred to PATI as: "A piece of the puzzle for the bigger picture of better governance for the people of Bermuda."

And he said the need for such legislation would be much less if the Government adopted a pro-active approach.

"What is really needed is a commitment and a will to share information, not when it is compelled to do so because there is legislation there," he said.

The UBP Party Whip also held up his hands to say that his Party was guilty in the past of operating in Government with a culture of secrecy, referring to the time when "the country was run out of yacht clubs" that was where the roots of the secrecy lay he said before pointing out that the Progressive Labour Party had learned to operate some of those same "levers" since taking power in 1998.

Mr. Barritt then spoke on the topic of a more open Parliament, with backbenchers from both sides being allowed to serve on watchdog-type committees and there being a question time session, as operates in Westminster, where Government Ministers are obliged to directly field questions of the day.set his sights on the media: "The press had the responsibility. They have not felt it incumbent to do their due diligence and research to access the kind of information and background sources through the resources available to them without any guidelines so they can sometimes get to the meat of a global issue relative to legislation or subject in the public interest.

"What always amazed myself is that they did not have to go far or look deep for the controversy at the surface, but when it was in the public interest to dig for the relative information that was significant for the public you could not find it not even on the back pages.

"Very seldom is there any in-depth discussion on the implications of the legislation, the processes how it may affect you, how you feel about it, different schools of thought."

He said PATI would now allow the public to do their own research.

But Mr. Blakeney was not taken by the idea of a Question Hour session for Ministers.

He said: "Now let's go to Ministerial questions, for what purpose?

"What's the ulterior motive? Consider the source of where the suggestion comes from and what they have as a modus operandi, which is what?

"Number one ? to embarrass the Government of the day. It has nothing to do with transparency."

Next to speak , said it was not acceptable to have Government quangos not reporting their business on a timely business and he claimed even getting a simple tape recording of the House of Assembly proceedings often took so long it was possible to build a house in the meantime.

He said that was the sort of thing that "chipped away" at the public's belief that any public access to information mechanism would ever be fully introduced.

And Mr. Burgess also expressed favour for a question time session, and added that if the Government was "up front" with information there would be less need for people to go "clawing and clamouring for information and, ultimately, the need for a public access to information commissioner would not be necessary.

He took issue with Mr. Blakeney for "castigating" the press, responding: "It is merely indicative of Government control. It is not our fault go digging up the facts and they run. When you read story after story 'We went to press and by press time we could not even get a phone call returned', you can't believe that there is a Government in place that is sincerely interested in the availability of public information and seeing to it that access is forthcoming."spoke about past UBP government's that had been "hand in glove" with big business on the Island and therefore not as open with information for the public as it should have been.

He said the PLP Government did not have these deep roots into the business sector and was therefore more interested in openness and transparency, and claimed recordings of the House are available in a timely fashion on CD discs.