May 15, 2003

Dear Sir,

People who are criticising the Attorney General for her threat to a judge in the House of Assembly last week are allowing themselves to ignore another serious issue.

The Speaker obviously knew the rules of the House did not allow Dame Lois to attack a judge in the way she did, because he tried twice to stop her. Eventually, though, he just gave in and let her rant.

To that, Members of the House should take the gravest exception. He had no business giving in. The Speaker has a duty to uphold the rules and the reputation of the House. He has been very quick to cut off members of the Opposition when he thought they were out of line, but he seems to have a different set of rules for members of the Government.

By allowing Dame Lois to continue, he allowed the House to become a party to the most egregious and shameful attack on the authority of a member of the judiciary that has ever, to my knowledge, occurred in Bermuda.

If he cares about the House, he should try to undo this wrong at the next day of meeting by apologising to the judiciary for Dame Lois's behaviour and for his error in allowing the House to become a party to it.

COLLOSIMO

Somerset

May 15, 2003

Dear Sir,

No matter what she says, the Attorney General's remarks in the House of Assembly on Friday were a threat to the judiciary - ‘Respect me, or else' can hardly be anything other than a threat.

It was a completely inappropriate remark for the most senior Government legal officer to make. Was it simple ignorance that made her do it? Or was it something rather more sinister?

Our society is underpinned by respect for the rule of law. Judges are very special people… they are given independence from control by the Government in order to allow them to dispense justice without fearing anyone and without needing to look for favours from anyone.

That Dame Lois might not have understood the position of the judiciary in our society is a truly astonishing thought - even children in school know better than that. I have an old copy of the Ministry of Education's Civics textbook, which is used in schools, and it makes the point right at the very beginning of the section about the law. It says, “A person has the right to expect the law to be more powerful than any individual.” It seems blindingly obvious that if the law is not more powerful than any individual, then our society cannot be considered free.

But I don't believe the Dame misunderstands at all. She attacked the judge concerned in the House of Assembly, where she is safe from prosecution. That means she not only understood what she was doing, she also had the cunning to comprehend that if she had made a similar attack in court, or outside the House of Assembly, she would have opened herself to prosecution for contempt.

So she understands, all right, but has become so drunk with the power she is enjoying in the PLP that she feels she is above the law, and can display her contempt for lesser people of any stripe, including judges, as and when she cares to. Lacking the ability to tell judges what to do because of the Constitution, she thinks she has found a way to scare them into doing her bidding.

There seems to be some support for that notion in her explanation to the House, and to the country, of the legal position she was in. Dame Lois was so completely wrong in her analysis of the case, that her explanation to the House must have been chosen for another reason. She was a party to the case, despite her protestations to the contrary, and as a lawyer, she could not have failed to know that.

This was a case in which a Constitutional right was in question. The Government had a clear duty in such a case to take a position and be prepared to help the court by explaining its reasoning.

Presumably, that is why the Bermuda Industrial Union made the Government a party to the case in the first place… the union hoped the Government would support its case. But when the Government realised the law wouldn't allow it to support the BIU, it chose, on her instructions, to take no position at all. People can draw what inferences they will from that, but at the very least, it shows that the Attorney General of this country has an agenda other than that of simply upholding the rule of law in Bermuda.

DAMIEN

Smith's Parish

May 14, 2003

Dear Sir,

I have a question: Do Dame Lois and the rest of the PLP feel they are above the law, above a Supreme Court Judge and above the Governor?

Her remarks, for the judges to remain respectful ‘or else', could make one very worried that with these types of people in power, it could be inevitable that we will begin to resemble a dictatorship.

Also, she might like to remember since she is the Attorney General, that the Governor is over-riding the PLP in looking at our failing judicial system and is indicating there will be a change to make it more effective.

JULIA KILLORAN SMATT

Pembroke

May 17, 2003

Dear Sir,

I have been reading today's edition of The Royal Gazette and found several articles and notices and letters that interested me. In case some of your readers were at the beach today, and not reading the paper, I thought I might create my reading list here in your Letters section.

In the Religion pages of the Saturday Gazette I read that Canadians are losing their religion. Unless you are counting Buddhists, which, as a group, is up 84 percent. Let's hear it for Buddha! Apparently, the point of the headline is the increase in the number of Canadians who do not identify with a particular faith or sect. That indicates to me a relaxing of prejudices. What do you think? Do we hate too much?

Over the page I read that the world's first inflatable church has opened for business in England. Inflatable nightclubs and pubs are in the works. Finally a place to take our inflatable friends, eh? That's all rather jolly, but I read elsewhere in TheGazette that the Rev. William Hayward is giving his “Final Report” at St. Mark's in Smith's Parish. In fact, by the time you read this, that will have been done. And what a shameful affair that has been. Everyone saying everything but the truth, prejudices before prayers. A child should have turned up and pointed out that the congregation's New Clothes were... well, not their Sunday Best!

On the Letters to The Editor page we have Elizabeth Kitson and Owen Darrell writing to voice their opinions that St. Paul's in Paget Parish should have any minister that congregation chooses in a kind of beauty pageant (with emphasis on what the contestants would do to further world peace, I suppose).

It's a fact of life in Bermuda that people go to the churches they prefer, to hear the individuals they prefer, and the messages they prefer to hear. Elizabeth Kitson and Owen Darrell are writing from Pembroke, and one would wonder why they would not attend the Parish Church of St. John's. Is the message different, is the God just a little different, a little better, in Paget? Let's see, I kind of prefer St. John the Divine over the other Apostles, think I'll go with his crowd. You lot, go check out St. Paul with his thorn in the flesh.

Of course, the question of whether a Vicar in one parish church should be permitted to preach, and raise the dead or bury them, in another parish is answered simply. The priest, or pastor, or minister, or imam, or rabbi is, by definition, a messenger. One might just as well tell the postman to stick to his route and not to fill in for his friend two routes over.

As long as we permit Mormon missionaries, Seventh-Day Adventists and Jehovah's Witnesses and other mobile preaching folk from overseas to tract door to door, end to end, which seems to be contrary to immigration rules, we must surely admit that the Light of God should shine on the just (in my neighbourhood) and the unjust (in yours) alike. If the Rev. William Hayward gets one of those inflatable churches, I would certainly consider attending a service. Perhaps a morning prayer in a park in the City of Hamilton, and evening worship in Flatts, next week St. George's and Boaz Island. Go ahead, regulate that! For shame!

ROSS ELDRIDGE

Devonshire

May 16, 2003

Dear Sir,

I like to drink milk. Fresh milk, not reconstituted milk. I also prefer one percent and skim over whole milk for health reasons. Given the current state of affairs, however, it's pretty difficult to satisfy my dairy desires.

I believe in protecting local industry provided that it is able to meet demand. It should not be protected if it is failing in this regard. Dunkley's Dairy and the dairy industry in Bermuda are clearly unable to keep up with demand. One cannot buy fresh one percent or skim milk at all and more often than not, two percent fresh milk is unavailable, particularly during the summer.

Why is Dunkley's Dairy afforded the protection of being the sole supplier of milk when they are so obviously unable to meet the needs of the public and supply an adequate supply of fresh milk at a reasonable price to the consumer? It's time to lift the restriction and allow the food wholesalers to import dairy products without restriction, giving the public more choice at a lower price.

LACTOSE INTOLERANT

Smith's Parish

May 18, 2003

Dear Sir,

Concerning the various comments recently re a compulsory retirement age, I'd like to suggest the following.

Instead of having a maximum retirement age at which the employee has to go, what about establishing a minimum retirement age (say 50), or a minimum length of service (say 20 years), past which someone has to work in order to be eligible for a pension, and let each employee decide for how much longer he or she wants to carry on working after reaching that age?

I've always felt it's counter-productive to get rid of employees just because they've reached a certain age. They may be quite happy to carry on working, and, provided their employers are happy to keep them, I think they should have the option to stay on if they so wish.

DAVIE KERR

St. George's

May 14, 2003

Dear Sir,

In recent weeks there has been much discussion on what happens to our health insurance when we reach the magic age of 65.

Gerald Simons was no help when he suggested that if you did not use it you lose. Or, I might add Paula Cox's solution that we continue to work to age 70.

On a personal note, as a member of the “Quality of Life Generation” l look on the question of growing old as just another adventure along the road of life. Let me tell you a story.

It was my mother who suggested to me, at an early age, that a fit body made for a fit mind. Taking her up on this I participated in some extreme impact sports, boxing, rugby, skiing, with a consequence that my body is shot, with my mind sure to follow.

With that said, just last week I received good news from a most unlikely source, my dog's veterinarian.

Old boy “Featherstone”, after his annual check-up was declared spry for his 15 years.

“One problem Doc,” I said, “he seems to be losing part of his memory.''

“Is that so,'' replied the vet, “I have just come from a seminar where a presentation was made on dog food for oldies. A kind of brain food if you will. Try it and report back in six weeks.”

My reply: “I will keep an eye on Featherstone and if it works for him you know I will try it for myself.”

I can just see me at age 120 with my body full of spare parts, knees, hips, spine; transplants galore, heart, liver, kidneys, my brain working just fine, barking at the moon and chasing cats.

DOUGLAS C. ROBERTS

Sandys Parish

May 15, 2003

Dear Sir,

One easy way to cut the waiting time in the Immigration line at the airport is to shorten the space between the queue and the Immigration counter.

At present, there is a several second delay as one person leaves the counter, and the next person picks up all their bags and so on and trundles the 20 to 30 feet to the counter. Surely a gap of five feet would be sufficient to give everyone their “space”.

P. DEFONTES

Warwick

May 19, 2003

Dear Sir,

So “Bashing”, you are saying that it is okay to constantly bash expats that work on the island and who help to keep the economy and companies progressing just the same as Bermudians do?

That doesn't sound too fair. They are here because of the companies that hire them. You can't single them out and say that they come here to take the jobs. I don't believe that is their intention. They are just the same as the many Bermudians that work in places other than Bermuda.

I can't see that all jobs that are advertised are contract renewals. There are many jobs out there that are not contract renewals sometimes very few locals apply. Why is this? It's an expat's fault? No, I don't believe so.

I do agree that all people should some way or another pass on skills to fellow workers but when they have the experience of dealing with people who don't want to learn those positions, “because that's not their job” then what are they to do?

WHY?

Devonshire

May 13, 2003

Dear Sir,

I would like to thank the idiot who stole my bike around 5.30 p.m. today for how to be recognised as a person who doesn't care about other people's property nor about God himself. You felt it was necessary to steal my bike which has the licence 927 AA on the back and is only a black Honda Scoopy 50cc knowing that I'll need the bike. Now I'm at the mercy of needing another bike thanks to you yet, you're at the mercy of God as to what lies ahead in your future.

Obviously you don't really care, otherwise you wouldn't have been reluctant to steal the bike to begin with. People like yourself are obviously bad examples for the youth of today and only God will properly dispose of you. Am I going to curse you off? Nah, I'll let God handle my rage even though I'm mad.

KIERON P.S. SMITH

Pembroke