Path to Independence

March 24, 2004

Dear Sir,

The big “I” word has returned for no particular reason except “Why not?”

One assumes the Premier's shop-worn rhetorical flourish in asking himself the question: “Why at this time” and his answer to himself hid some reasons:

a. He had just had a tiff with Government House - i.e., the British Government - which also had had the temerity to ask for responses to the question: “How should the Bermuda Constitution be changed?”

b. He faced some pressure within his own party to do something about this area of the PLP's creed.

c. He has some people in his party who feel they are owed cushy jobs, like ambassadorships (of course, these jobs should be sold to the highest bidder, someone who might be willing to pay for the privilege of parking your car anywhere in New York, for instance).

d. He thought that if he focussed people's attention on Independence their attention would be drawn away from some of the real problems which face the community. Other politicians have found this a good method of obtaining re-election. Margaret Thatcher, for instance, was returned to power at one election on the basis of her war against Argentina over the Falklands. On the other hand the Vietnam war boomeranged on President Johnson - and it may well be that the Iraq war will boomerang on President Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair. With us the battle over Independence toppled Sir John Swan from power. So it is by now means a certainty that the Premier has taken a safe road to re-election.

If - “some time” as the Premier says - we will face the question in reality then it is obviously the democratic way to do it by referendum. It is true that the British Government got rid of much of its Empire through accepting the election of a party which wished independence.

You remember the scenes: Departing British Official: “I must congratulate you, dear leader, on persuading your people to do the right thing. And now, dear boy, before we part it is my duty to hand you the keys to the Treasury - oh, yes! and here with me is Herr Gnome from Zurich, who is anxious to make your acquaintance!”

Of course, when it came to the same sort of question - i.e., a degree of independence for Scotland - being put to Britons they resorted to a referendum, and did so over closer links with Europe. Probably will once more. Remember Gibraltar - where both the people AND the Government were against losing their colonial status, to the dismay of British officialdom.

With us the question: “Do you wish your Government to negotiate Independence for you?” could be put on the ballot paper at a General Election, so that the people could choose the party to carry out their mandate (over 50 percent of the registered voters). This system is practised in a number of American states.

For myself I think Bermudians are practical enough to handle Independence successfully - but equally, are practical enough to wish it only if it will bring some advantage to us all. This could happen if European Union rules become onerous, and it looks as if our economy would be helped by getting out from under the European thumb, despite the fact that rich Americans thinking of using us as a financial centre feel their money is more secure while we remain a colony.

WILLIAM S. ZUILL, SR.

Smith's Parish

P.s. How the Premier thinks he will influence Bermudians towards Independence by consulting troubled Jamaica beats me.

Creating a diversion

March 22, 2004

Dear Sir,

I support Jonathan Dyer's letter published today, but I don't think he goes far enough in explaining why a General Election is not the right way to decide the Independence issue.

We effectively have a two-party system, so to determine Independence or not one political party would have to support Independence (presumably the PLP since Alex Scott raised the issue) and the UBP, by default, would have to oppose it.

For the issue to be decided by an election and for the result to be valid all the PLP supporters would have to vote ‘Yes' and all the UBP supporters would have to vote ‘No'.

This is clearly nonsense. There are PLP supporters who are for and others who are against Independence and likewise with the UBP. For whom is a staunch UBP supporter to vote if he/she favours Independence but not under a PLP government and likewise with a PLP supporter who is against Independence?

If the PLP were smart enough to figure it out, they would go to the next election “on their record” and assuming they win, hold a referendum on Independence. If the referendum result is not the one they are after, hey, they are still the Government.

Having said that, my advice to them would be to hold a General Election on the issue, because they would very probably lose and then maybe we can get back to solving the real issues.

Let's face it, when the US President is in trouble and needs to create a diversion he starts a war, when our Premier is in trouble and needs a diversion he talks Independence.

CAREFUL VOTER

Smith's Parish

Indecent proposal

This following letter was sent to Development Applications Board and copied to The Royal Gazette.

February 26, 2004

Dear Sir,

I am writing this letter in regards to the proposal published in the Bermuda Sun on February 13 to build 34 units on Alexandra Road and Mary Victoria Road in Prospect, Devonshire.

As a long-term resident of this area it is difficult to express my outrage with this proposal. Only one who has lived here can understand the extent of the insult to myself and other residents who have worked hard to make a home and a neighbourhood we are proud of. Since we are are still governed by the Bermuda Housing Corporation we have had to face endless battles to receive any attention or consideration for even the most basic of difficulties. Additionally we have had to endure a complete lack of respect by the BHC when expressing our concerns of the social problems that occur on a regular basis: noise pollution, “wall sitters”, children playing in the street, drugs, and an increase of violence among other issues. No matter how we approach them we received no satisfaction until the situation becomes a crisis situation. The BHC appears to have adopted an attitude of ‘we provided housing so we have done our part... now, get on with life.' No responsibility has been assumed for the social difficulties they have created with their houses, their tenants, nor the infrastructure of their units.

My question is: Why would you ever let this type of landlord build more apartments in such an overcrowded and neglected neighbourhood?

I believe it is imperative that as members of the Development Applications Board you view our neighbourhood and the sites for the proposed building. If you are sincere in your mandate to ensure the environmental and social needs of a community are addressed before any plan is approved I hope a social impact study of this area will be completed.

Additionally, I highlight the lack of community and recreational space contained within these plans. Using the assumption that each proposed unit will house five to seven members, approximately 200 bodies will inhabit an area that is already overcrowded and overdeveloped. There will not be enough space! We have a playground that is too dangerous to use, a playing field that is unsafe and two concrete roads that are already overused. This proposal is not addressing this problem and will only lead to an implosion of our community.

So in considering 34 more units, you must assume that most of them will provide for at the very least five to seven members in each unit. I am also including the proposed two bedroom units in this estimate. In fact we have units already here that contain seven children in addition to the adults that reside there. Recently we had a tenant that was finally evicted for rent in arrears who had four adults and three children living in his two bedroom unit and on top of that he had pitched tents in his backyard and had a number of men living in them. We had complained and tried to have this situation sorted out but it was only after he had not paid his rent for a number of years that the Bermuda Housing Corporation took steps and had him removed.

Since your decision on this proposal will impact on such a large number of people and even more on such a large number of families and senior citizens I challenge you to at least come up and walk around our neighbourhood. Come up and see the condition of the only playground provided for the children that already live up here. Have a good look at the size and the condition of it. I will gladly provide measurements and pictures of it. I will be especially happy to provide pictures of the current occupants of it that make it completely off limits for any child let alone most adult most nights.

I would also like you to consider the location of this playground. It is right in the middle of our housing estate - right out our front doors. This playground was purpose built for this housing estate and although it is under our lease it has been used by the Housing Corporation to satisfy any complaints from the Flat Top tenants. This has led to endless disagreements in our neighbourhood.

We also have a small playing field at the bottom of our estate but because of its location and also again because of lack of supervision it is rarely used. This also is under our lease and technically should not be in any way included in this proposal as part of recreational or open spaces for these families as the Housing Corporation is pushing for us to take over this lease as free hold as soon as possible. The only reason that this has not been not done up to this date is because of the condition of the estate and this proposal we have refused to discuss it.

I could continue on about all of the other problems that any more units in this neighbourhood but I am sure that others will expand on them much more articulately than I could. So I will thank you for your patience in reading this and hope in some small way it gives you another reason to reconsider for social and humane reasons to consider our objections to this plan. This is not just another housing proposal. This is a Bermuda Government application and this is part of their solution for the housing problem on this Island. Your decision could affect many people, often some of the most venerable, for many years to come.

A PROSPECT RESIDENT