Few dared to speak on Monday's Privy Council ruling
It's the topic on everybody's lips — or so you might think. But yesterday Islanders and expatriates alike were reluctant to say what they thought of the Privy Council's decision to allow the reporting of more revelations from the leaked Police dossier on the Bermuda Housing Corporation (BHC) scandal.
Guest workers shook their heads and hurried on when asked if they had any thoughts on the law lords' decision to uphold previous refusals by the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal to gag the media.
And Bermudians spoke of fears that they would be "blackballed" from jobs and housing if they gave an opinion.
A few locals did share their views — and most said they felt it was the public's right to know whether or not politicians had behaved unethically.
The leaked file centres on corruption at the publicly-funded BHC and reportedly contains allegations about the involvement of the Premier and other politicians.
Marilyn Cupidore, from Devonshire, told The Royal Gazette: "I basically think that the public should know but I think there is a reason they don't know.
"It should be public information. There is obviously a reason why they don't want us to know."
The 23-year-old administration assistant said not all of the information need necessarily be shared — but pertinent details about politicians should be.
"Nobody is going to read 2,000 pages anyway," she joked. "For those that do want to know, I think it's good that they now can. Most people want to know because of the Bermudian mentality to know people's business."
A Corporation of Hamilton worker on Court Street — who would not give his name — disagreed. He said: "I think it's the wrong decision. They should find the person that leaked it out.
"I think it's not the public's business; it's none of their business."
A male colleague, who also wished to remain anonymous, added: "What's in the file? It's the Government's business, not my business. They run the Island. I respect the Government."
Steven Mills Govia, a homeless 46-year-old, suggested the Government should spend more money helping people like him rather than fighting costly legal battles.
"The public should know," he added. "There are serious charges and we should be told who was involved even if it was the Premier."
CedarBridge student Loreesa Burchall was also pleased with the Privy Council decision.
"I think it's good that the newspapers are allowed to print stuff," said the 17-year-old, from Southampton. "It seems like the Government did try to cover it up and they didn't want it to go to the Privy Council.
"I think the truth should come out no matter who it points to so that the public knows what's going on and where their money is going. The taxpayers should know where their dollars are. If the Government has done something wrong, they should be held accountable."
Retired firefighter David Burrows held the same view. "I think that anything that the Government does — or anybody attached to the Government — should be transparent. I don't care who runs the country as long as they are transparent.
"It's public funds. I want to know what's in the file. If it has something to do with public funds I should have the right to know."
Two taxi drivers on Church Street said it was true that the public had a right to know but questioned the motivation behind the file being leaked.
"I think it's very political, that's why it's all happening," said one of the men.
The other added: "To me it seems like it's been malicious to put this information out there. If the Government decided to put it out there then fine and dandy. But you can't convict anybody off allegations."