In the eyes of many around the world, Bermuda is probably now demonised as the so-called tax haven that shields multinational companies from the billions of dollars they owe.The billions that could go to job-creating initiatives in countries suffering from recession, or to fund life-saving programmes in the developing world.It appears to have stirred up a groundswell of anti-Bermuda feeling. A lot of the UK press spoke in terms of Bermuda being ‘summoned’ to meet Prime Minister David Cameron, and our own Finance Minister, ET (Bob) Richards, said there appeared to be a groundswell of opinion against offshore financial centres.But here is the other side of the coin.As John Kay, a columnist in the FT said: “The sources of the problem are not to be found in Bermuda, or the Channel Islands. The activities that escape taxation take place in the G8. The correct starting point is the flawed structure, and implementation of corporation tax, in the G8 itself.”There is also more than a little hypocrisy in the finger-pointing from the UK on matters of transparency. Australia-based Professor Jason Sharman provided a dose of reality in a 2009 study which involved him trying to open anonymous shell companies, and bank accounts, 45 times across the world. These were successful in 17 cases, of which 13 were in OECD countries.As The Economist reported at the time: “One example was Britain, where in 45 minutes on the internet he [Prof Sharman] formed a company without providing identification, was issued with bearer shares (which have been almost universally outlawed because they confer completely anonymous ownership) as well as nominee directors and a secretary. All was achieved at a cost of $753.“In other cases Mr Sharman formed companies by providing no more than a scanned copy of his driving licence. In contrast, when trying to open accounts in Bermuda and Switzerland, he was asked for documentation such as notarised copies of his birth certificate.”So which jurisdiction needs to up its game?It cannot help but appear that Bermuda (a country that still holds slightly mythical status in the UK) has been scapegoated (Mr Richards’ words as well) for political expediency, and popular blame.It is to be hoped that the recent focus on Bermuda quickly passes, and that no lasting damage is done, and that those who really understand the business that Bermuda is in, are not deterred from coming here, or continuing to do business here.A tiny island such as Bermuda — a dependent territory — which faces its own very serious economic issues, deserves more help, and respect from the ‘Mother Country’ whose recovery from disasters is often aided by money from this Island’s reinsurers.It does not need to be put in the firing line of international attention by the leader of one of the world’s most influential countries, in the run up to a meeting of the G8. From this viewpoint it smacks of being hung out to dry.Mr Richards said that Bermuda’s message was being overwhelmed by the virulence of the ‘tax haven’ noise. He said that Bermuda would have to step up its public relations.Mr Cameron, Bermudians are also fighting for their livelihoods, they get no tax breaks, they are losing their jobs too.We deserve better.* Tell me what you think in 140 characters or less. Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/jeremydeacon1