Fifty people gathered in St. George's last night to air their views on the imminent electoral reform which could see single seat constituencies become the norm and the number of MPs reduced - and some of those were politicians.

It was a poor show for what has become a hot topic of debate on the Island, and which led to a petition of more than 8,000 names being collected and sent to the UK last year over the way in which changes to the Constitution were being handled.

Government has proposed that single seat constituencies be created, giving every voter one vote of equal value. And it has also suggested that the number of MPs could be reduced from its current 40, to anywhere between 20 and 40. Last night, at the second public meeting of the Boundaries Commission, the general consensus seemed to be that change was needed to the present voting system.

However, the disagreements arose when it came to how those changes should be made, and where.

And, as in the first public meeting at the end of January, calls went out for the Boundaries Commission to provide the public with more information on how changes could be made, and how and why they would work.

The commission, chaired by Sir Frank Blackman, was asking members of the public to voice their opinions on how many MPs they think there should be in the Houses of Assembly, and where the new boundaries should be drawn. And at the end of the meeting, the Commission made available the first details of the Census 2000, giving a breakdown of registered voters by constituency and the Census district.

Robert Zuill said he believed people needed more information if they were to make informed decisions on how many MPs there should be. And he suggested the Boundaries Commission give examples of what improvements would be made if there were only 30 MPs, or 35 MPs, and so on. He said: "In my view, what is happening here is a bit like putting the cart before the horse because we are being asked to give opinions on things that we don't know about."

And he said all over the world, countries were increasing their number of Government representatives, but Bermuda was trying to reduce them.

"Why are we doing this? People say that we are overly represented and we have far more MPs than anyone else," he added.

"We need a certain number of people within the Government under the Westminster system, in order for the Government to function. What is the number that is actually needed? It would be great if you could put forward a number of models showing us what would happen....

"Regardless of what the population is, we need a system that is going to work."

Audience member David Hughes said he wanted to "clear up" a few misconceptions in the community that had arisen in the discussions over electoral reform. He said Bermuda did not have a Constitution because the people had not been involved in the writing of it. Instead, he said the Island had a Constitution Order.

And he said Bermuda would never know democracy until it was independent from Britain.

He said: "For instance, in a colonial setting, how can you have democracy? You can't have a colony and then say you have got democracy at the same time. It's a pack of foolishness and it confuses the electorate."

And he said changes to the voting structure would not create democracy in Bermuda, but it would make it more "acceptable". And he also said reducing the number of MPs would reduce costs for Government.

He said: "People are complaining now, but they didn't complain when the boundaries were drawn specifically on colour lines. Before, it was in their favour, so it was OK. Maybe, it's someone else's turn. I don't believe in that, but that's why they did not challenge it before."

Edward Benevides, from St. George's, said he did not have sufficient information to make informed choices or suggestions to the commission. He said: "I could give a number if I had more information, which I could base my reasons on. I don't know why reducing it from 40 will make sense."

But a call also went out last night for the Commission to work the new boundaries into the current parish districts.

Dr. Stan Ratteray, who is a member of lobby group the Association for Due Process and the Constitution, said the group had come up with seven different models whereby new constituencies could be created within the parish lines. And he said, with their models, there would only be up to a seven percent difference in the populations of each one.

He said world-wide it was considered acceptable to have a difference up to ten percent. He said it was important to keep the areas within the parishes because people identified with where they had been born and raised.