Great Wall unfinished

April 13, 2010

Dear Sir,

The Great Wall of Warwick at the junction of Keith Hall Road and Middle Road now sits abandoned and unfinished! This ugly wall took a whole team of men approximately 18 months to get as far as they have, it regularly caused disruption to motorists and I dread to think how much it has cost.

Could someone please explain why it remains unfinished? My guess of course is no money left in the pot!

SUE GARLAND

Warwick

Bank directors' 'legacy'

April 14, 2010

This is an open letter to Robert Mulderig, chairman of the board of The Bank of Butterfield and a director since 1996.

Dear Mr. Mulderig,

In my letter to you of last week, published on the day of the annual general meeting, I invited you to apologise on behalf of the board of directors of the Bank, for the "big mistake". I then invited you and your fellow Directors to "fall on your swords" as the only honourable course of action for a group of individuals (with the possible exception of Shaun Morris who came onto the Board only in 2007) who approved an investment strategy that led to the Bank's near collapse and has left a great many shareholders in dire straits. This was a call repeated from the floor throughout the AGM by a number of shareholders.

You did apologise, which is a positive step, but you declined to resign, citing the need for the "legacy directors" to remain on the Board to lend their experience and knowledge of the Bermuda market to the new directors nominated by the new Investor group. Whilst the meeting was an annual general meeting at which Directors are normally elected/ re-appointed or removed, the Bermudian shareholders were thwarted in their attempt to influence the composition of the Board by two factors:

¦ The Bye-laws provide for rotation of Directors so your name (and others) was not on the list; and

¦ We now only hold approximately 20 percent of the voting shares so could only lodge a protest vote at the re-appointment of the "legacy directors" – tilting at windmills perhaps.

We learnt that, in terms of compensation – although specifics were sorely lacking since the "BSX Rules don't require the Bank to disclose such details":

?You, as the chairman, earn $71,000 a year for your services; and

? The directors earn $47,000 a year for attending Board meetings and serving on committees.

I would put it to you that this is $71,000 or $47,000 more than any shareholder is getting since dividends have been suspended and will remain suspended for a good many years to come. Even if they resume before the Bank is sold, they will be heavily diluted.

I would challenge each "legacy director" to step down and if you will not do so then I ask you to forego your annual compensation and, instead, pay those funds/ shares into a Fund for the Alleviation of Hardship suffered by certain shareholders who relied on their shareholdings for their "pensions". The Fund could then be used for the alleviation of serious hardship where it is genuinely being suffered. There are still six "Legacy Directors" on the Board so that would create an annual fund of $306,000 (unless you also get $47,000 as a Director, in addition to your $71,000 as Chairman). Not a huge amount compared with what has been taken away but at least symbolic and may pay for a few Meals on Wheels. At least, you might then be seen to "suffer" alongside your shareholders.

"Legacy directors"? ... quite a legacy Mr. Chairman.

Yours faithfully,

MICHAEL SPURLING

St. George's

P.s. To the New Investor Group and the new management team, you have my thanks for "rescuing" the Bank and you will probably earn my support as we go forward – it seems to be sound team. My grievance is with the legacy directors who have yet to show true transparency and accountability.

What else can you do?

April 14, 2010

Dear Sir,

A few years ago, when he became Minister of Tourism, the Premier mandated a series of "product launches" in Boston, New York and Philadelphia. After the events were over, he said to a staffer: "You all can throw a great party. What else can you do?"

I find it interesting that the most positive thing we have seen about tourism lately is the on-Island "Love Festival" and a series of fancy events (parties, really) in "cities where wealthy British people" live. Let's see how many of these wealthy Brits show up on our shores this summer!

JUST ASKIN'

Paget

UK is more than England

April 14, 2010

Dear Sir,

Having read today's issue of your paper on the Internet I am slightly annoyed that your Tourism Board, on a freebee to the UK to promote Bermuda with free deals for honeymoon couples, seems to think that the UK consists only of England,what about Scotland,Wales and Northern Ireland? Maybe they should be taught that the UK consists of four countries. Thank you for your excellent paper which I read every day.

JIM ROBERTSON

Fife, Scotland

Let visitors rent cars

April 11, 2010

Dear Sir,

If I could think of one single change which would attract more tourists it would be rental cars. Small cars like the tiny Chevrolets, Smart Cars and others we have here now. Americans and Canadians are quite used to driving on the left in the UK and that would not be a problem for them. Visitors would feel much safer than they do on bikes. Visitors to other jurisdictions can easily hire cars and for the most part that's what they want to do and the availability or not of car rentals does figure in their vacation location selections. Car rentals provide a freedom to do more and see more and not have to rely on public transport or availability of taxis. It would create a new mini industry and thereby benefit the economy. For efficiency, we could also create small car parking spaces.

Older visitors and others who are uncomfortable on bikes would welcome car rentals. Sure, cabbies would moan as would in town parkers, but in the long run it would benefit Bermuda, now suffering a tourism meltdown. The only downside I see is that it would reduce business at KEMH.

R C WHITING

Paget

Defining corruption

April 14, 2010

Dear Sir,

Before we make an attempt to stop corruption, we must first recognise that there are several types of political corruption. The loyal supporters who are quick to defend when accusations are made against the governing politicians should familiarize themselves with the terms – bribery, extortion, embezzlement, nepotism and patronage systems.

Wikipedia has defined those terms as follows:

?Bribery is the offering of something which is most often money but can also be goods or services in order to gain an unfair advantage. Common advantages can be to sway a person's opinion, action, or decision, reduce amounts fees collected, speed up a government grants, or change outcomes of legal processes.

?Extortion is threatening or inflicting harm to a person, their reputation, or their property in order to unjustly obtain money, actions, services, or other goods from that person. Blackmail is a form of extortion.

?Embezzlement is the illegal taking or appropriation of money or property that has been entrusted to a person but is actually owned by another. In political terms this is called graft which is when a political office holder unlawfully uses public funds for personal purposes.

?Nepotism is the practice or inclination to favor a group or person who is a relative when giving promotions, jobs, raises, and other benefits to employees. This is often based on the concept of familism which is believing that a person must always respect and favour family in all situations including those pertaining to politics and business. This leads some political officials to give privileges and positions of authority to relatives based on relationships and regardless of their actual abilities.

?Patronage systems consist of the granting favors, contracts, or appointments to positions by a local public office holder or candidate for a political office in return for political support. Many times patronage is used to gain support and votes in elections or in passing legislation. Patronage systems disregard the formal rules of a local government and use personal instead of formalised channels to gain an advantage.

When certain Government officials assumed power, I can recall a statement being made that they would take care of their PLP members and their families. What exactly were they implying because this statement alone, according to the Wikipedia definitions, suggests a corrupt mindset? How many of the PLP members and/or their family members have been taken care of since that statement was made?

What is needed is legislation to address the above-mentioned types of corruption. Have any of our Government/Public Officials, who hold positions of power, misused or abused their power for dishonest or unlawful gain? If so, it is fact that the improper use of influence, power, or other means for private gain is called "corruption".

Considering Bermuda's small size, the many personal relationships involved and the trust given to governing officials, the opportunities to engage in corruption are numerous. So, once the supporters, who have previously defended the actions of some politicians, have familiarised themselves with the types of corruption defined, they should begin to recognise that the problem appears to be more serious than they imagined.

JENNIFER CAINES

Devonshire