criticised for the absence of any recommendations for the size of the House of Assembly.

There are other omissions as well.

There have been some claims made that Bermuda is over-governed, because it has 13 Cabinet Ministers and 40 MPs, a relatively large number of the 30,000-plus registered voters on the Island.

But there is no evidence to show that having fewer MPs will lead to better representation, and constituents benefit from the fact that there is a good likelihood that they will know at least one of their MPs personally or will get to know at least one during the Parliamentary term.

Reducing the number of MPs will make the connection between constituents and MPs more distant.

At the same time, parish boundaries have given constituents a sense of connection with their MPs, which will be lost if and when the parishes are no longer used as a guideline.

Still, the likelihood is that Parish MPs will be a thing of the past. That does not mean that some form of parish governance cannot replace it.

The PLP's platform, along with the promise of single seat constituencies, promised a greater role for elected parish councils and this pledge has been made in Government's Throne Speech as well.

In June, 1999, Health Minister Nelson Bascome told The Royal Gazette that the Parish Councils Act was being redrawn to make them elected bodies and to outline their powers. Since then, there hasn't been a peep.

That's too bad, because the removal of representative government from the parish at the national level should go hand in hand with increased powers at the local level. Elected parish councils would give people a say in local politics and would give the less populated parishes some say in local government.

Elected parish councils would also give community leaders some stake in the governance of their neighbourhoods and would give them some experience of representative government before entering the House of Assembly.

Ms Smith's paper also contains another significant omission. Nowhere does it propose a reduction in the size of the Cabinet. This is important because a smaller House will require a smaller Cabinet; keeping the Cabinet the same size in a smaller House would give it near-dictatorial powers and make the backbench nearly irrelevant.

This change does not require a change to the Constitution, because the Premier can appoint as few as six Cabinet Ministers now.

But no discussion on reducing the size of Parliament is complete unless it also considers the role and size of the Cabinet.

Of course, it would be possible to keep the House at 40, and keep the Cabinet the same size as well. Cynics will see that as unlikely since another long-time PLP policy is to have full-time politicians and Cabinet Ministers; that argument is made stronger if there are fewer elected Parliamentarians who have wider responsiblities and stronger arguments for more pay.