Anyone who has been following the legislative saga of "The Bailout" in the US now knows why politicians have a bad name.

In the face of what may well be the most severe financial crisis the US has experienced in almost 80 years, the world has witnessed partisan bickering when unity and bipartisanship is called for.

Unfortunately, it has been also practised by Senators and rival Presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama – two politicians who claim to be able to work with legislators of differing political views.

As disheartening as this episode in Washington has been, it puts into perspective the partisan bickering that characterises so much of the Bermuda political process.

On the one hand, our politicians don't look so bad when the representatives of congressional districts that have more voters than Bermuda has people who can't agree on a way out of their current crisis.

But at the same time, it is surely an object lesson. Rhetoric and point scoring seem so infantile when there are real issues and problems begging to be solved.

It is fair to say that the Westminster system can bring out the worst in elected officials; it encourages divisiveness. And the inherent secrecy in our system of government can get in the way of openness and transparency.

But that does not mean there is no room for agreement; two events in the House of Assembly's special session last month showed that when politicians want to work together for the common good, they can.

One was the decision by the Joint Select Committee on Education to open its meetings to the public.

The other was the acceptance by the Government of an Opposition amendment to the Park Hyatt bill, and a subsequent agreement in the Senate on the hotel lease.

The very fact that MPs on both sides agreed to open meetings of the joint select committee is a landmark decision. It is to be hoped that if it works well, then other committees, particularly the Public Accounts Committee, will open their meetings as well.

There is no good reason why select committees should not meet in public. As with the House of Assembly, it would give the public better insight into how decisions are made, how their elected officials are performing and will diminish any fears about decisions being made behind closed doors, only to have them presented to the public as a fait accompli.

In most parliamentary systems, committees provide oversight on issues and areas of Government when decisions have often been made in private by the Cabinet.

There is some justification for Cabinet secrecy – although it can be and is taken to extremes – because Cabinets operate on the basis of collective responsibility. That means that once a decision is taken, the whole Cabinet must stand behind it, regardless of Ministers' personal opinions. When a Minister feels particularly strongly about an issue, they have the option of resignation.

That's not the case with select committees, where members always have the option of writing a minority report.

On the Park Hyatt bill, just one of four amendments moved by Oposition MP John Barritt was accepted in the House of Assembly. It dealt with owners' rights and was reasonably technical. But the Government accepted it, and that shows MPs can work together.

To be sure, the Government did not accept another amendment – to bring the actual leases back to Parliament for approval – but a watered down amendment was accepted in the Senate whereby the leases will have to be publicly tabled.

That may not be entirely satisfactory; after all, Bermuda has just given up a substantial amount of land for the next 262 years.

But the important point here was that amendments were proposed and accepted, even with modifications.

Governments are often reluctant to accept amendments, largely because they fear it will be seen as a sign of weakness.

In this case it was not. It can mostly be seen as good sense prevailing over partisanship. Let's hope it's not the last time it happens.