Subsidise visitors

June 4, 2009

Dear Sir,

There is much chatter about the decision on whether gambling should be allowed on docked cruise ships after hours. Most of this chatter revolves around gambling being a cure-all to our tourism problems.

It is clear to me, and hopefully any other open-minded citizen or resident, that gambling is not the answer.

Recently, there have been two initiatives made by the hotels which have found success. First was the $99 Fairmont sale, then the most recent joint venture between the hotels and the Tourism Ministry. Both of these promotions were successful without gambling being introduced into the equation.

What does this tell us? I believe that it speaks to the fact that gambling is unnecessary. Whether some consider it right or wrong is not the issue. If our prices are competitive, our promotions reach the correct target market, and our service measures up to our promises, we will have a good tourist industry. We may never again see the industry of the past because things have changed worldwide. The current economic situation will also preclude some from travelling as smart people are holding onto their disposable cash.

However, reviving the industry is possible without gambling, whether on board cruise ships, or on our shores.

To counter/balance the purported income generated through gambling, one suggestion is that instead of wasting millions of dollars on advertising, use the same money to subsidise travel and directly offset the cost to potential visitors. If each visitor receives a voucher to apply to some Bermuda-based tourism attraction, restaurant, shop, reduced airfare or accommodation, that money would be much better spent rather than blasting ads into unproven markets. That could create a win-win situation for all in the industry and be a much better use of taxpayer money.

JEAN-ANNE TUCKER

Southampton

Price for marina

June 8, 2009

Dear Sir,

Please allow me to respond to the building of a marina at Spanish Point Boat Club.

Although I live here in Boston, I still hold a resident address, in Spanish Point, Bermuda. So I am able to vote in Bermuda elections.

I do not disagree with building of a marina at SPBC. I think the members of the boat club should have somewhere to put their boats and be able to get to them easily. Now if the boat owners want something, they have to give something, everything comes with a price.

In return for a marina at Spanish point, here's what I would like the boat club to give up, and only if they give these things or give back to the non-members/people of Spanish Point.

{1} They, the members, give up all moorings in Stovell Bay/Peter Tucker Bay.

{2} Encourage and see to it that government dredge Stovell Bay to allow the people of Spanish Point somewhere to moor their boats, the black people of Spanish Point that used to moor their boats in Boss's Cove/Stovell Bay cannot moor their boats in either of these places any more, it's a terrible thing to give up so white people can distance themselves from us. We own boats also. We would like somewhere to put our boats too.

{3} The boat ramp that is in the car park of the SPBC should not be in the control of SPBC. When I wanted to launch my boat, I was told that I would have to go to the Boat club to get permission to used the ramp. If I am not mistaken, that ramp was built by Public Works Department, with Government funds when Government stopped people from using Stovell Bay Beach from storing and launching their boats because it was an eye sore to white people of Spanish Point, we the people/boat owners agreed to move, and not to put our boats back there in exchange for a boat ramp to be built for us to launch our boats.

That ramp should be put back to the people of Spanish Point, we are not saying that the members of the boat club cannot use the ramp, as they are Spanish Point people also.

{4} The Boat Club should dismantle that horrible looking boat dock, and dredge Peter Tucker Bay.

I am not trying to play the racecard here, all I'm saying is that there are black and white people living in Spanish Point, why shouldn't we all be able to enjoy the same things in the same area, why should some of our Spanish Point residents, have to go to Dockyard to moor our boats, what we fail to realise most is that we are all Bermudians.

ROBERT SEAMAN

Boston, Massachusetts

Premier must go

June 1, 2009

Dear Sir,

Ewart Brown must go (maybe into show business). The money will still be flowing in from the tax payers. Does Paula Cox sign blank cheques?

The sidekicks will rally, after all, they are getting theirs.

Every nationality in the world must be here, even "the Taliban"" who knows? These people are even working as cashiers, sales people, etc.

New GP's every where, being used as private cars. So called foreign experts coming in, who can't even solve their own countries problems. Why not bring Dennis Watson home to work?

All the building going on, who knows what's under this volcano. There will be an explosion in more ways than one. Stop the greed.

H.J.W.

Pembroke

Where are Police patrols?

June 9, 2009

Dear Sir,

Police presence? What a laugh! Tourists and locals are being robbed. Road rage and speeding is increasing not decreasing. Road deaths are increasing not decreasing.

Buses and large trucks (water trucks, Works and Engineering, cement trucks, etc.) are driving at crazy speeds and crossing the lines into oncoming traffic. These huge vehicles are weapons and they need to slow down.

When are we going to actually see a Police presence every day? Not just once a month, here and there.

The Police need to be out there "nailing" these people daily!

The courts need to heavily increase the fines and licences need to be taken away.

It is a privilege to be able to drive, let's take away their privileges. There have to be consequences for these offences and the public needs to know that they are there if they don't abide by the rules of the roads.

Let's get the Police walking in pairs once again on the streets of Hamilton (not just on Front Street for show); all streets.

Get the police bikes out every day in all parishes.

We are only going to see more deaths, more robberies and fewer tourists if this is allowed to continue.

We have had three road deaths in one week and one person in critical condition? How many more do we need before something serious is done? Why can't the Governor step in and work with the Government Ministers to change some of our laws and implement them asap?

SERIOUSLY CONCERNED CITIZEN

Sandys

A lack of judgment

June 15, 2009

Dear Sir,

Please allow me the opportunity of critically commenting on the Premier's decision to allow Uighur detainees from Guantánamo Bay into Bermuda. The internationalist in me wants to applaud this decision as a matter of principle, given the human rights atrocity that was Guantánamo and the less-than-stellar record of China. I am fully confident these individuals pose no public security threat to Bermuda. But I should not get to make that decision. Nor should any one person, including the Premier.

What assurances do we have that these detainees are safe? These individuals were picked up at training camps near Tora Bora in Afghanistan and early intelligence indicates that they may have been part the Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement in Western China, a terrorist group according to the United Nations. If both the Bush and Obama administrations have cleared them of wrongdoing, then perhaps there is little to fear. But this is simply a case of Government officials saying: 'Trust us, they're safe. We know better.' How can we be sure?

What about implementation of their integration into Bermudian society and the obvious ramifications for our job market in Bermuda? And what does the grant of Bermudian status to these new arrivals say to the numerous Long Term Residents who have been stationed in this island who have no hope of gaining status? It certainly does not say that their government cares for them.

Where was our say, as Bermudian residents, in approving this decision? This move strikes at the very heart of the constitutional balance of powers that exists in Bermuda. The people are the font of Democracy on the island, as represented and mediated through their MPs. There was no Parliamentary debate, and it appears that Cabinet wasn't even involved. Further, that the Premier's authority has been diminished in his own party in recent weeks casts further doubt on the legitimacy of Dr. Brown to conduct foreign agreements. No one, it seems, was given any means of holding this Premier to account.

Under what authority does the Bermudian Government accept refugees independently of Britain? As much as Dr. Brown may hate it, we remain a British Territory and must continue to subject such overseas dalliances to scrutiny by the UK Government. The Premier of Bermuda may think that accepting these individuals is a purely internal matter, but someone needs to remind him that Bermuda is not a State Party to the 1954 UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees or the 1967 Protocol — but Britain is. Furthermore, there is an irreducible core of obligations owed to refugees stationed in third party nations — and the obligation to grant full citizenship rights is not one of them.

It seems that this move was hastily conceived and the Premier and Americans basically presented it to the Governor as a fait accompli. For all intents and purposes, it cannot be reversed since the only alternative at this point would be to return the refugees to China. Once refugees hit Bermuda's shores, certain international obligations were placed on the British Government to ensure their protection. These are the same international obligations that put these men in Guantánamo Bay to begin with since bringing them onto American soil would have triggered those obligations viz. the US.

Did we get something in return to justify this move? The Premier and Minister of Home Affairs claim there was no quid pro quo, but surely the hope of gaining diplomatic leverage with the US had to square in these negotiations. Especially, in light of any possible American threat to our offshore industry, one can readily understand the eagerness in wanting to ensure the dollars keep flowing.

But we must always remember that we remain a small country, whose interests are best served by active engagement on multiple fronts and in multilateral forums, as Minister Cox's recent efforts to have Bermuda removed from the OECD's list of tax-havens demonstrated to us. The hope that the Obama Administration's political capital can protect us from an assault on our industry is overly optimistic, especially since it is actually Congress and its powerful committee chairmen that write American tax law.

President Obama's political capital has been grossly overestimated in recent months and the fact that his administration could not get these Uighur detainees placed on American soil should serve notice of that. Just consider Virginia, where its congressional delegation (including a Democratic Senator of Obama's own party) was successful in pushing back on the Administration. Will he and his team come to bat for Bermuda when the time is right? Will they even be able to?

Dr. Brown is naive to think that the issue can be neatly claimed as an immigration issue, and therefore, purely domestic. It is not. His decision would in theory give these individuals access to a British Passport, and places on the British Government's agenda new diplomatic rifts with the USA and China. The British, unlike Bermuda, have had real concerns with domestic and international terrorism. London was bombed, lest we forget, and the UK lost lives in Iraq and Afghanistan. Islamic fundamentalist cells have sprang up throughout Europe in the last few decades. No doubt the recent news that deaths of foreign troops in Afghanistan have risen by 78 percent on a year ago should demonstrate just how on edge the British are (source: Guardian, June 11).

These actions also have to be placed in the proper diplomatic perspective. The British have been in intense negotiations with the Obama Administration (as have other European governments) over the repatriation of Guantánamo detainees in Britain proper. They had already agreed to repatriate all British citizens who were detained, and clearly Gordon Brown felt this was enough assistance on their part. Remember that this comes at a time when the British military has drawn down their presence in Iraq, and Nato is pushing for greater troop numbers from the UK and the rest of Europe. The diplomatic dance with Europe also involves questions as to whether the USA would be willing to take in Guantánamo detainees as a precondition to further cooperation on their part.

Many countries (including normally refugee-friendly Canada) have questioned taking in these detainees, rightly or wrongly. Irrespective of who approached who first on this important file, the US-Bermuda agreement will put back progress in resolution of the Guantánamo issue, contrary to what organisations such as Human Rights Watch may say. Political expediency triumphs over a long-term, sustainable conclusion – something Liberals and humanitarians the world over should be concerned about.

Such was the breach of diplomatic protocol this episode involved that it will have to be resolved at the transatlantic ministerial level. The Washington Post reported on June 12 that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton had to discuss the matter with Foreign Secretary David Miliband to assuage British concerns. The British press are having a field day decrying this breach in the trans-Atlantic 'Special Relationship'.

None of this is to say anything of the position the Chinese have been placed in by this decision. You can bet that apparatchiks on the Politburo are paying close attention to this and will have long memories. Should the refugees be repatriated to China? Probably not. But this is precisely the sort of thing that modern governments have extensive diplomatic corps for. This is the sort of issue that is analysed and pored-over by specially trained professionals with years of experience and numerous contacts around the world, before any final decisions can be made by the political class. Easy talk of 'humanitarian grounds' fails to grasp the reality of stepping on any number of toes, sensitive initiatives and active bilateral engagements.

The Governor recently pushed back on a story from the Guardian that the UK would suspend our right to conduct foreign agreements, but did admit to a review. This is truly frustrating for many of us who love Bermuda – in the Premier's quest to be 'independent,' there is a fear we may be losing some of the legitimate independent powers we had. But then again, this seems to be about independence through the back door. Dr. Brown knows he can't win the support for independence from the UK so he decides to stick his finger in Britain's proverbial eye in hope that they will just cut their losses. I would hope that both supporters and opponents of Independence are able to agree on the lack of wisdom of this approach.

The Governor recently stated "[t]he security is about the other implications to having the four arriving here at least for the time being. You don't have to be secretary general of the UN to see these other implications." How very true. Dr. Brown is not the Secretary-General, and indeed, he did not seem to see these implications. However, I'm more inclined to believe that he just did not care.

The hoopla surrounding this episode is not just the case of a Colonial Government getting uppity. The least the Governor and the FCO should have been given was the opportunity of vetting this decision. Even diplomatic equals afford each other that courtesy. Dr. Brown wants to think of Bermuda as just such a diplomatic equal to everyone else, but this isn't the behaviour of one.

The Premier has shown a lack of judgment, a lack of understanding and a lack of political maturity in this whole affair. His approach bares all the hallmarks of a siege mentality, complete with autocratic rule. And it's easy for a Premier who does not have to contend with international terror and military engagement overseas to make this kind of decision. In his quickness to make nice with the Obama Administration, the Premier just might be getting himself in way over his head. If Dr. Brown wants to play pretend-diplomat, there are a plethora of courtesies governments pay each other. He may like to pay attention if he hopes to do so for real in the future.

RICHARD AMBROSIO

London

We'll be judged by Brown

June 25, 2009

Dear Sir,

Dictator: A ruler who has absolute, unrestricted control in a government without hereditary succession. The last time that I checked, Bermuda was not a dictatorship.

It is true that we have a voice that represents us and that is meant to be the voice of the people as a whole. This voice is a voice that we depend on to lead us, it is a voice that we should be able to trust whenever we hear it. The person this voice belongs to is a person that should work selflessly and with the safety of the people in mind. With the recent events involving the four Chinese men who were detained at Guantánamo Bay, I am not so sure that the voice about whom we are supposed to feel so confidently about is one that could be heard. The person we so greatly depend on was not dependable.

Dr. Brown's independent decision to allow these men to be invited into our homeland was deceitful and had no support from anyone at the time but Sen. Burch. Dr. Brown failed to inform the Island, his own Government, and the United Kingdom about this possibility, thus raising many eyebrows as to why.

I am not going to make inferences or assume why Dr. Brown was so quick to allow these men to Bermuda. The point that he keeps trying to avoid, is the main point that the protesters and the people have been trying to make.

The protests were not against having these men in Bermuda nor were they about trying to get the men out of our country. The protests and the anger are directed towards the Premier's actions as a leader, as the voice.

The fact our leader felt he did not need to inform the public, let alone his fellow party members demonstrates that he has no concern for the people's opinion, that the selflessness that is an eternal asset and necessary quality for a leader was not present. I do not care about the Premier's possible ulterior motives, I do not care what the benefit was, because from where I stand, it seems as though this situation could only benefit one person, the decision maker.

People of many races watched and participated in the protests to do with this whole situation. The no confidence vote seemed to be a strong one from many people's perspective. I have never seen so many people be so passionate about something in Bermuda. It was incredible to see people from all over the Island coming together to voice their opinions, for it seemed that no longer could their voices be known through the Premier. Some tried to twist these protests as a racial protest again the Premier. If you truly believe that those protests were about race, go back to the videos and just listen. Listen carefully, look at the diversity, race was not mentioned. This is about the Premier's way of dealing with the situation, not his race. The man who is meant to be in communication with the people went silent when it came to this issue.

The success of the protests seemed to be almost forgotten when the debates that took place on June 19 began. It was not so much the debates that pushed the protests into the dark, as it was the Premier's apology for his actions; an apology that Dr. Brown could not give to Mr. Butler moments earlier in privacy, yet he was able to when the media was around. What does this say? Is it honest? So as soon as someone says that something like this will not happen again, it really won't? Ask yourself how many times you have heard something like that, how many times you have said that. Now that Dr. Brown has won his debate, hopefully he will not deceive the people because he has a lot to do to gain the trust back of the people and to prove that he can be the voice we so greatly need. People always say that no matter the type of person you are, you will always be associated with the people that you are around. Dr. Brown is the person that we will be judged by.

CAITLIN GORDON

Concerned Bermudian college student

Smith's

–