The road to hell is paved with good intentions. The CURE (Commission for Unity and Racial Equality) was formed and funded with good intentions but left to languish by the United Bermuda Party.

Under the chairmanship of Kenneth Spurling it achieved effectively nothing in three years. It was composed of too many angry black activists who did not seem to see past their own hurt. But I should not blame the commission, the blame must be with the Minister in the UBP Cabinet -- they were changed so often in the last five years of "power'' (not responsibility) that none of us can remember who they were -- nor does it matter.

But what inspires me to write is hearing the new chairman, Mr. Phillips, articulating the same meaningless stupidity. By that I mean his or the Commission's focus seem to be on the "RE'' in CURE -- racial equality. The focus needs to be on the "U'' in cure -- unity. We need to know where we have come from so that we can plot a course on where we must go.

Unity will come from dialogue. Too many angry black activist raise their fist -- almost all whites hide in the corners with their heads in the sand hoping the anger will go away -- it won't! The white population at least owes the black activists an ear.

Their story is actually one that is intensely moving and the white community should hear it. Hearing (and listening) might even allow some closure for the frustration and anger.

Why do I so often mention (Dame) Lois Browne-Evans' status? Because we all know who she is. I hear she waved her mother's birth certificate in the House of Parliament. Does she have her grandmother's certificate then? My point, however, is thus: my grandfather, Dr. Hutchings Frith, who brought me up on Cedar Hill, was already a practising dentist before any of Lois Browne-Evans family came to this Island. Frankly, he resented the invasion of thousands of West Indians from the turn of the century to the end of the Second World War.

It saw them as a threat -- the truth is they work hard and built Bermuda as labourers, masons etc. and educated their children who are now the political and Civil Service leaders of Bermuda. Remember my letter calling the PLP the St. Kitt's Club. Remember my challenging their incumbents in the House of Assembly to come up with ten Bermuda born grandparents -- they never took me on did they? But in case my point was too arcane or obscure let me make it clearly. What is the difference between them all immigrants and, hence, only status Bermudians, and the white English doctors, lawyers, dentists, accountants and policemen who were given status and are called "status'' Bermudians as if to demean their contribution to Bermuda when we needed them as much or more than the black "invasion'' from particularly Kitts and Nevis, only thirty years before this white "invasion''.

You see, as an indigenous Bermudian I feel I have the right to draw a line calling all these West Indian Bermudians -- status Bermudians. But drawing lines is dangerous -- perhaps someone will put you on the wrong side of the line.

And before I lose the opportunity, I am an indigenous Bermudian. My ancestors were the first here and quite simply that is what makes indigenous.

Obnoxious aren't I? Calling all you black West Indian Bermudians -- status Bermudians. But now you know how people who came a little later than you, but contributed just as much, feel about your insults.

One of the commissioners of CURE told me some four years ago that only one in nine (yes one in nine) white Bermudians were born Bermudians - do you see what I mean about competency to sit on CURE.

But, and finally, back to UNITY -- unity will come from us seeing where we have come from.

I went to the three long term residence meetings last year -- at all three meetings the question was asked "How many of these 2300 potential status Bermudians (the long term residents) are white?'' Now you can see why I call politics in Bermuda "Race politics''.

The final irony on status is that the three top civil servants are status Bermudians and the Minister herself, Paula Cox is not a Bermudian Cox as some might think. Her grandparents come from St. Kitt's & Nevis! So who is policing the police.

SANDERS FRITH-BROWN Warwick What is the hurry? July 21, 1999 Dear Sir, Most of us are accustomed to travelling at, or just a hair below, 50 kph. That is the speed limit that has been enforced for years. So, when we find ourselves travelling behind someone driving at 35 or 40, it's all too easy, when the road is clear and there is a direct line of sight, to whiz by them at 60, and then settle back down to our comfortable 50 kph.

Recently, I was detained for doing just that, and rightly so. The immediate effect this had on me was to cause me to wonder, "What was the hurry?'' I am, by nature, a punctual person. I seldom have to rush, because I always leave myself enough time to get where I am going, with a margin for safety. Why, then, was I in such a hurry? I wasn't. I was just doing what comes all too easily: adding a little burst of extra speed to what we all now consider normal. I decided immediately to adopt a slower pace as my own, personal norm, in spite of common practice. On an island only 22 miles long, the difference between, say, 40 kph and 50 kph is, let's face it, negligible.

I have been distressed to read many of the letters that you have received regarding the recent "Go Slow Day''. Yes, I believe the legal speed limit should be the speed limit that is enforced. But I surely wouldn't like to see us adopt the 50 kph limit that has become standard as the legal limit! On "Go Slow Day'' I observed traffic generally flowing at a steadier, and much slower pace. I felt a tone of old-fashioned courtesy and patience on the roads that I had not, before, realised was missing.

I imagine that our guests, too, riding unfamiliar two-wheeled vehicles, must have felt an enormous sense of reprieve.

People will always and everywhere expect a bit of `slack' in the enforcement of speed limits, but 43 percent (enforcing 50 when the speed limit is set at 35) is, in my view, much, much too much of a margin to be called `slack'. In my view the speed limit should not be altered and the level at which it is enforced should be lowered by at least ten kph.

Slowing down the pace of life will be a kindness to ourselves.

CRIS VALDES-DAPENA City of Hamilton Too painful to see trash July 21, 1999 Dear Sir, I have a dream, a recurring vision, in which many people who love Bermuda, men, women, children who, like me, are so distressed to see litter and garbage spoiling this lovely land and ruining its reputation as Paradise on Earth, begin to do a very strange thing! They are all starting to pick up one piece of litter each time they go outdoors instead of just complaining or feeling overwhelmed.

Because it has become too painful to see the trash, they start to pick up one safe piece (no broken glass etc.) a day just to get over the helpless feeling of "Whatever-Can-We-Do? It's-too-big-a-problem'', and put it in the nearest garbage can.

And this strange behaviour becomes contagious and more and more people start doing it. And soon some of those who have been thoughtless feel a little ashamed to drop another bottle or styrofoam cup or to just leave their take-out remains sitting on the wall because a neighbour or friend will soon pick it up quietly, making no complaint. And it becomes as taboo to litter as it now is to light up a cigarette in the bank or other public places.

And in my dream Bermuda once again becomes truly Bermuda the Beautiful because it's full of beautiful people who respect themselves, each other and the earth too much to let it become a garbage dump.

I have a dream, and all of us are part of it.

SISTER KING Devonshire Aches blamed on tower July 22, 1999 Dear Sir, When I come from work each night I immediately get a headache. It's a kind of throbbing ache at the back of my eyes. The frightening thing is that the headaches started around the same time that Cellular One turned on the power to their cellular towers. I live about 200 feet from their Warwick tower and am concerned that if my headaches are being caused by emissions from their tower, then what other conditions are we being exposed to? Their towers are ridiculously low and so close that urgent action needs to be taken to ensure that these do not pose a health risk, to those living in close proximity and to all of Bermuda. Ironically, it seems that health was not an issue when planning permission was sought.

Originally BDC (Cellular One) wanted to have four high towers but decided against it as they thought that they would not get permission for high towers.

Instead of attempting to get permission for the four high towers, (and high towers already exist in Bermuda), they chose to have low towers Island wide for aesthetic reasons.

The Warwick tower is hidden behind Casuarina trees. The Scotts Hill tower, for example, is there for all to see. Please take a drive up and see for yourself how Cellular One have treated the people of Bermuda with complete contempt.

The towers are so dangerously low you could almost hang your washing on them.

The public needs to be protected from the adverse health effects of these towers. There are many safer, effective alterations to what they have built and Cellular One are quite aware of them.

Please help make Bermuda a safer, healthier place to live and raise your children.

Please do not subscribe to Cellular One until they place their towers higher in safe unpopulated areas away from schools, playgrounds and neighbourhoods.

CONCERNED Warwick Other options for tower July 23, 1999 Dear Sir, Why can't these so called "safe'' cellular transmission antennas be installed on existing transmission towers? The Warwick Camp tower seems to have a great deal of usable space on it, and it's very tall. I've also seen other similar existing towers, which look to be able to accommodate this antenna.

Let's be reasonable, there are options! HSC Warwick `AXperts' got logo wrong July 23, 1999 Dear Sir, Think of a big foreign advertising agency, working on a new corporate concept for a huge international Bermuda-based company...Better, bigger, millions of dollars of market research behind them...you get the picture...you know, real `AXperts'! Bermudians can always recognise one of those, they're foreign! And you know sometimes how you get the giggles when you're supposed to be serious, and don't dare meet anyone's eye because if you do, you'll burst out? I'm only being presumptuous now, but I imagine that's the situation with all the local advertising people after looking at ACE's new corporate identity logo. Here's a piece of work I'm sure they're only too willing to let foreigners take the credit for! I keep imagining the ACE bigwigs who let's face it, are only meant to be finance whizzes not artists, pecking away in front of their global monitors, nodding in solemn agreement with the design review committee decision...rather like the king who had no clothes! But hey!, other than being able to read what I see, what do I know? If it wasn't for the phenomenal amount of money I'm sure ACE was charged for it, I'd almost be amused...

S.J.H.

Sandys Parish We shouldn't over-react July 28, 1999 Dear Sir, I would like to respond to the letter from "Faith, Hope and Charity'' published on July 27, under the heading "Economy Under Threat''. I have been peripherally involved in some of the discussions relating to the inclusion of fiscal offences in our Proceeds of Crime legislation and I understand and share some of the concerns being voiced. However, there is a risk of over-reaction and I believe we should view the developments in the context of evolving international relationships between offshore and onshore.

Onshore governments are of the view that offshore jurisdictions lend themselves to wholesale tax evasion. Their view is generally exaggerated and in jurisdictions like Bermuda, the Channel Islands, Isle of Man and others, the view is generally wrong. We also recognise that economic jealousy plays a part in their thinking. However, collectively (e.g. through OECD) they are able and are now inclined, to apply significant pressure to those jurisdictions which make a business of tax evasion. Like others, Bermuda must distinguish itself as a competitive, innovative, well-regulated but not overly bureaucratic, low tax platform. I believe that the concessions to be made, although significant with the inclusion of fiscal offences in our legislation, will help us to achieve this.

The Guidance Notes to be applied to the legislation will be critically important, because the application of the law must be practical and commercially realistic. Regulated institutions have already taken on responsibility for being vigilant against drug traffickers and money launderers. However, institutions cannot be held responsible for policing everyone's tax status (including those investing in Bermuda-based mutual funds). There must be a recognition that the purpose of the legislation is to combat substantial, systematic, intentional tax fraud. The preservation of the distinction between tax avoidance (which is every tax payer's right) and tax evasion, which increasingly is being recognised as a global offence, must be preserved.

There is not doubt that a lower tax base in Bermuda is a competitive advantage in many situations. Taking advantage of different tax levels in a competitive business environment does not constitute tax fraud and should not, therefore, be an issue under our legislation. The open and honest testing of tax saving opportunities should not be interpreted by us as attempted tax fraud.

I think the writer will agree that decades ago Bermuda recognised that pure tax haven business would not be sustainable and we set-out to attract business with more substance. Many will recall that as the insurance industry developed in the 1970's, several captive insurance companies ran into difficulty writing third party business in an effort to preserve the tax advantage which the IRS was working to reduce. However, the reduced tax benefits did not kill the captive insurance concept, nor indeed Bermuda's dominant involvement in it.

The previous writer suggested that onshore jurisdictions would lower their tax rates if they wish to compete with us. That argument appears to be unrealistic and somewhat naive. Indeed the kind of rhetoric contained in the writer's first paragraph is reminiscent of the arguments against the relaxation of exchange control. We clearly have cause to be cautious and whilst we would not volunteer to make these changes, failure to respond to this demand to provide a mechanism to combat serious tax fraud, would also have negative consequences for the future of our international business.

BARRY L. SHAILER City of Hamilton