August 5, 2004

Dear Sir,

I am writing to you because to be honest I am at my wits end. I am a student who has always managed to maintain an excellent grade point average and keeping it that way is no small feat. Yet now I find myself in a dilemma. I am on my last leg of my schooling and I am happy to be so. Yet when I reach out to the banking community, whom I have done business with in the past, the only response I get is: ?Well you need to have some one to back you?.

Back me? I have had a loan with the bank in the past and paid it off before the required time. My credit is great and I have also been an upstanding citizen in the community. I have yet to hear from any bank employee an explanation as to why there aren?t any provisions in place for students who have maintained excellent credit in the past. Or provisions for students period and I am not talking about the loan that provides $10,000 a year and school fees are $20,000.

I give willingly to our community and yet when I try to do the right thing by furthering my education to better serve children with special needs, all I get is a slap in the face. I am in no way saying that I have never had a scholarship. For this reason I will not apply again because it?s not fair if I overexploit that entity. So I want to be responsible and obtain my last leg of this journey through the banking community. Yet this does not seem to be a feasible situation. Yet about two to three weeks ago I read in the paper that the National Training Board is offering funding to married couples going back to school.

Are they saying that I must go and get married to a fellow student before I can get funding? This simply does not fit in with the statistics concerning marriage. From what I see most marriages end in divorce before the fifth year. So why are these persons deemed to be the ideal situation in regard to funds for schooling, according to my math it is cheaper to finance one person than it is two, isn?t it? Tell me what did I miss! Now I know what you are thinking, what about just saving the money, well you tell me what I am suppose to save during the summer while maintaining the cost of living in Bermuda when working in my field pays $400 a week.

Another concern that my friends and I find most astonishing is that we can find funds for our former and present members of the Westgate Correctional Facilities to do further education classes and then become lawyers etc., but we do not have the money to provided students who are from upstanding (not necessarily wealthy) backgrounds with a loan ? not a hand out ? to serve their country. So I am presently considering committing some petty crimes that would land me in jail for about a year or so, so that I may complete my education via the taxpayers? dollar, desperate times, call for desperate measures!

Many of my American classmates often tell me about the countless loans that are available to them via their government. The present Government calls for Bermudianisation, well we can never be Bermudianised if Bermudians can?t get funds to further their education. Many of our Caribbean counterparts have qualified natives because they have chosen to educate their own instead of employing foreign consultants on a regular basis. I find this astonishing! Mr. Editor and the people of Bermuda, I ask you, is there any solution to this dilemma or have I really exhausted all of my resources and be forced to throw in the towel when the light at the end of the tunnel shines brightly!

NEED FUNDS TO GRADUATE

Hamilton Parish

August 10, 2004

Dear Sir,

I am writing on the subject of the wide media coverage given to a particular Rottweiler owner/trainer, who appears to protest the breed ban mainly for self-serving reasons. The video footage aired on ZBM ?s main news last week, of this (same?) person demonstrating attack training (sleeve work) is not ? as he would have the public believe ? a responsible demonstration of ?Schotzen Arbeit?. It is far from it. This is not general obedience work. The commentary on ZBM was that this ?trainer? was giving a demonstration of ?putting dogs into and out of an aggressive state?.

This understanding ? or should one say, complete lack of understanding of canine intelligence and behaviour is precisely why the ban is needed and should continue until Bermudians can demonstrate a more profound and sensitive understanding of their companion canines, and that ?putting canines? indeed in particular certain, innately more aggressive types of canines (that is those genetically selected to enhance this trait) ?into and out of an aggressive state?, is irresponsible, and not a sport.

There is only one area where Rottweilers (not ?Rockweilder, or ?Rock weelers?) that have been put through this sort of training are responsibly in use, and that is with military police in various jurisdictions in anti-terrorist situations. As for regular police crowd and security work, they are not suitable, for many reasons, which would make this letter too long. Yet again, through your valued newspaper, I should like to express the following points:

1) Schutzen (protection) work makes use of the intelligence of the domestic canine, selected for over 30,000 years. This genetically anchored intelligence causes them to watch their human companion very carefully, monitoring nuances of change in facial expressions, body and behavioural language, for queues to their own required behaviour. The canine learned over many generations that this was essential for his very survival.

2) Some dog types are more responsive than others. In general the shepherding types are most suitable for Schutzen work.

3) They do this work to please their owner/handler and for no other reason.

4) Therefore, once trained in this way to detain other humans, this dog should never again be separated from the handler. It is a bond, which cannot and should not be broken. the dog lives within the same social group as the human handler. If and when this is no longer feasible, the dog would be put to sleep.

5) Dogs trained to this level should be required to wear a distinctive unique collar/harness and should not be in public without their handler.

6) A special licence should be required of the keeper-handler.

7) In Bermuda I believe the only requirement for such training is in the hands of working police/customs officers until such a time as the criminal element no longer views his canine companion as a vehicle to enforce criminal order, in other words, as an alternative to an offensive weapon.

In maintaining the breed ban the Department of the Environment is trying to safeguard public order and safety. They have little choice if they wish to be viewed as a responsible government. There is still so much work to be done in regulating this type of training, before there is another serious accident such as the one I experienced. Putting large and powerful dogs into and out of an aggressive state is extremely disrespectful to the canine mind, and a very dangerous ?messing around? in animal behaviour. Once you train an animal in this way, you cannot simply deprogram him and pass him to a new home.

DR. A. M. WARE-CIETERS

August 10, 2004

Dear Sir,

In your letters column dated August 10, 2004, Mr. T. M. Trott states that he found it quite hilarious ?When Mr. Calvin Smith accused me of being ?steeped in bigotry and race hate? as I am a black Bermudian?. My statement was triggered by the following statement written by Mr. Trott in a letter to the editor dated July 27, 2004.

The letter stated: ?Former PLP Senator Calvin Smith is an excellent example of a good man with all the wrong ideas. His obsession with Independence is both peculiar and dangerous. With all the examples of negativity, widespread corruption, money laundering, and self-destruction we see from Caribbean nations how could any sane, logical person turn around and tell Bermuda that the Caribbean is a role model for Independence?? And he concludes: ?Please Mr. Calvin Smith, let?s work together to end the lunacy?.

I?ll be honest. I did not expect such obvious bigotry to be coming from a black man with respect to predominantly Black people. However, the fact that he is black does not absolve Mr. Trott from an investigation by the Human Rights Commission since the Human Rights Act forbids the publication of statements that ?are threatening, abusive or insulting to any group, based on colour, religion, ethnic origin or Nationality.? Clearly, Mr. Trott the laws of Bermuda do not regard your comments as a laughing matter with respect to the thousands of West Indians and their descendents who live among us.

CALVIN J. M. SMITH

Pembroke

June 10, 2004

Dear Sir,

It is with interest that I note that recent advertisement for the position of Head, Operational Risk Management at the Bank of Butterfield, or Butterfield Bank as they wish to become known. Listed as part of the Core Responsibilities of the position is the task of evaluating the effectiveness of internal controls. As I understand it, Operational Risk is best described in part, as ?the risk of loss caused by internal or external events, such as procedural failures, errors or fraud that affect the Group?s systems, controls and management processes?. Any actions taken that are contrary to written policy, should raises serious questions regarding procedural failure and therefore warrant intense scrutiny.

When a new investment account is opened for example, with professional advice being sought, the standard practice appears to require a detailed questionnaire to establish the goals, objects, risk/return and constraints that apply to the client. Important information in order to determine the appropriate asset allocation and create an account reflecting the client?s individual needs. When an account is opened without this fundamental background, it is cause for concern. Any financial institution handling other peoples? money requires strict adherence to multiple rules and adequate documentation is a key, fundamental standard that all clients are entitled to expect. Why would the clients? carefully given instructions not go on file? Why would this lack of documentation not cause alarm to those who are responsible for monitoring the effectiveness of the control systems?

A file without client instruction and without written reference to asset mix should have some record of percentage allocation. A follow-up made directly with the customer is more likely to provide an accurate set of figures rather than the procedure used by the Bank of Butterfield which requires closer examination and is worthy of attention. Would it not be more precise to ensure that adequate client information forms and investor profile documents are kept on file, this of course protects the interests of both parties and ensures that full compliance is not compromised. A relaxed standard in this area is a recipe for disaster and it is hoped that Mr. Thompson, President and CEO, will address these troubling issues.

Further concerns arise if documentation is apparently not what it says it is. Why, for example, would the bank present an Advisory Agreement for signature and then after a lengthy period allege that the terms of the agreement were modified orally at the time of signing, effectively changing the powers to discretionary for all initial investment. Would it not be more efficient to present a document which accurately portrays the type of agreement accepted by the clients? The method used by the Bank of Butterfield surely leads to a situation where the credibility of any signed document is tested, if at a later date claims of oral modification are introduced involving senior citizens in this practice is particularly disturbing.

Gaining direct access into client funds is another area causing concern. Surely by claiming effective control of client assets a heightened level of fiduciary duty arises. Would it not be prudent to ensure that written documentation is obtained from the clients authorising this activity? Otherwise situations may arise that can be extremely complex involving a number of competing interests, commission based remuneration being one.

Since his arrival, Mr. Thompson has made clear his sincere commitment to compliance and the need to be vigilant and also to support and encourage high regulatory standards. I fully support his goals and am in agreement with his comments made some time ago that the tightening of regulatory controls is not something that companies should resent. The importance of strict internal controls, rigourously enforced at all times and for all clients, cannot be overstated.

BEST PRACTICE

Hamilton Parish