In the face of questions about Government-ordered reports which have not been released to the public, the ruling Progressive Labour Party insisted yesterday that it had fulfilled its promise of conducting Government business in the sunshine of public scrutiny.

But acting Premier Eugene Cox said that it was not always a good idea to release every report to the public. The United Bermuda Party (UBP) has charged Government with being unnecessarily secretive about the public's business and failing to deliver on its own campaign promise of transparency.

The UBP says that some seven or eight reports - including a review of the Bermuda Regiment, a taxation review, a report on asbestos disposal and a paper on Civil Service reform - which should be publicised have been missing for years.

And they have transformed their discontent into key items on the “good government” planks of their platform, advocating a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and a Whistleblower's Act.

Last year ruling party backbencher Dale Butler joined the Opposition in its call for the reports to be made public, saying that such information was vital if he was to do an effective job as an MP.

Another document being called for is an annex to an agreement made by Bermuda with the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Asked why the Bermuda Regiment review had not been made public, Mr. Cox said: “Many times we have reports done and the idea is to get information so that one can make decisions based on factual information,” he said. “Too often when you just put out a report without an accompanying document it sometimes can be more confusing for people without those outlying documents. They will misrepresent the facts and so on.”

He pointed out that, based on his experience as shadow Finance Minister, releasing reports to the public was an “alien” concept to the former government.

Health Minister Nelson Bascome later confirmed that a report into asbestos removal had been completed and had been placed on the agenda for Cabinet after the election had been called.

Mr. Bascome had ordered the review in 2000 after allegations that a company which involved ruling party MP Arthur Pitcher had improperly removed the dangerous substance from a St. David's construction site. St. David's residents claimed Mr. Pitcher's workers removed asbestos without masks and that the toxic substance was taken away in open trucks leading to them being exposed to it.

The Royal Gazette revealed at the time that Mr. Pitcher's company flouted planning rules by not getting a permit prior to beginning the removal of the asbestos when he was building 20 Bermuda Housing Corporation homes on Texas Road.

The report ordered by Mr. Bascome was to look at all aspects of asbestos on the Island, but he promised it would also deal specifically with whether the law had been broken by Mr. Pitcher's company.

As yet no one outside Cabinet and the experts that worked on it, has seen that report. Asked if the report will see the light of day, Mr. Bascome said : “It's not a Southside report, it's an asbestos report. It breaks down all of the buildings in Bermuda and those are public and private buildings that have asbestos. It also reports on all of the abatements over the last 15 to 20 years and also it will make recommendations to prepare legislation...”