I hope you print this letter, in which I would like to express my disgust in the Government's double standards. The Government is lending what can only be described as an illegal hand to Steven Astwood's cause. The expectance of the Government along with Astwood's agent Barry McIntosh is completely ignorant.

They would realise this if they would only take a look at this country's immigration policies. If you do not qualify for a work permit, as in this case Bermuda is not ranked in the top 70 of the world's soccer nations, NO WORK PERMIT! Now I know it's apparently about giving him a chance at his dream.

Give me a break, can you see your own Government letting the immigration services bend the rules for and expatriate, to give them a chance? If you are not qualified for the job, sorry, NO WORK PERMIT! Why does the Government understand this rule for themselves, but want it manipulated to fit the needs of a Bermudian seeking work abroad. Then comes the plea from Mcintosh of Bermuda being a British territory. Bermuda, being a British territory does not give any legal right for Astwood to be employed in the UK. Not qualified, NO WORK PERMIT! I can't start to understand, where McIntosh gets his theories from. I quote "why therefore should England turn her back on her son in his time of need?'' England is not turning her back and he is certainly not her son! As I am English and I work here on a work permit, does this make Bermuda my Father? At the end of the day in Bermuda and the UK, immigration policies are in place for numerous reasons. None of which count for potential, giving chances, etc but rules. Plain and simple rules. When your rules of immigration are so cut and dry, how can you expect any leniency for the rules to be bent in your favour? Next time you go forth to support a Bermudian in a job application, I suggest you take a long look in your own back yard in regards to your expectancies. My concerns are also for the growing population of Preston, where I was born and raised, from the descent of foreign workers, as yours are for the growing population of Bermuda due to expatriates.

A QUALIFIED EXPAT Southampton Open letter to Paula Cox The following letter was sent to Paula A. Cox, Minister of Home Affairs and Public Safety and copied to The Royal Gazette .

September 12, 2000 Dear Madam, The epilogue of the Discussion Paper on Bermuda's Long-Term Residents encourages members of the public to write directly to you. The message in the second to last paragraph is that, with the input from people in the community, "Members of Parliament will be able to debate for Bermuda's Long-Term Residents''.

There are so many issues and options set out in the Paper that I concluded that I should not attempt to deal with every point. Instead, I have selected a few topics on which I shall expound and I have added some discussion points of my own.

Madam Minister, I confess that I am unreserved in my commitment to Bermuda and, Bermudianisation. I also confess that protectionism in the areas of jobs and quality of life are very important to me.

Notwithstanding any of the foregoing, I believe that the Long-Term Resident issue is one that has to be approached and considered from both factual and humanitarian points of view. The facts will speak for themselves but our collective consciences will have to play an active roll to ensure that we do the right thing in the interpretation of the human side.

When I looked at the Analysis of Data, there were two issues that were predominant in my thoughts. (a) How many people are affected? and (b) What are their ages? The Discussion Paper reveals that, although 551 of those eligible applied for Working Resident's Certificates, the actual number that could have applied is approximately 1,400. We are left to speculate why others did not apply. I believe that it is safe to reason that some are retired or very close to retirement. From a workforce point of view, it is noteworthy that, of 551 WRC applicants, 296 or 53.72 percent were between the ages of 50 and 59, 102 or 18.51 percent were between the ages of 60 and 69 and 30 or 5.44 percent were 70 or older. Simply put, this means that 428 of the 551 applicants could be considered past normal retirement age, near retirement age or at the top of their careers. This leaves 123 or 22.32 percent of applicants under the age of 50 with approximately 15 years in the workforce, under what may be regarded as normal circumstances.

Madam Minister, considering the breakdown of the numbers as set out above, are we spending an inordinate amount of time and money on an issue that, in my opinion, is controllable and, with the proper safeguards in place, will not be repeated? Are we using the proverbial sledgehammer to kill the proverbial fly? Nowhere in the Discussion Paper have I read that there are any moves by Government to revoke any Working Resident's Certificates and ask the holders to leave. I therefore feel that it is safe to assume that these residents will be permitted to stay.

It is obvious that from the position of jobs, there is a measure of security for the residents who have the WRC. However there is a concern expressed by a WRC holder about hiring priorities. There is no argument or disagreement about the hiring of Bermudians and spouses of Bermudians in that order. The concern of the WRC holder is that there does not appear to be any priority that is set to favour WRC holders over regular work permit holders. Surely a WRC holder should expect to have priority over a normal work permit holder. This policy would assist Government in its quest to keep down the number of new work permit holders! The Discussion Paper gives a strong indication that the essence of the Government's position appears to be very limited in the area of possible offers of Bermuda status. One of the options speaks of the possibility that a general offer may be made to Long-Term Residents that includes security of rights to seek and hold employment and security of home ownership.

Unfortunately, the suggested options on real estate purchases make the security of home ownership a viable choice for only those residents at the high end of the economic ladder.

This option also poses a number of questions. Is it the position of the Government that Long-Term Residents should be content to live and work in Bermuda and own a home without the right to vote? How permanent is this security of residency? What is there to prevent the present Government or a future government from a radical change in policy or laws that would negatively affect the position of Long-Term Residents? In my view, without Bermuda status, there is no real security.

Madam Minister, is enough thought and consideration being given to the other important segments of the lives of Long-Term Residents? I did not see a mention in the Discussion Paper of the contributions of Long-Term Residents.

The record will show that Bermuda has benefited and continues to benefit from the knowledge and skills of many of our guest workers that they bring to their various jobs. The record will also show that Bermuda benefits from their active participation in voluntary and charitable organisations. It saddens me to hear some of my fellow Bermudians suggesting that non-Bermudian workers have ulterior motives for their community involvement. From my own experiences when living abroad and having worked with many non-Bermudian residents in various organizations here, I am confident that the majority of those who become involved do so for the right reasons.

On a recent talk show one caller expressed his view that we owed Long-Term Residents nothing as they were well paid for their work. Another caller rebuked his fellow caller and gave an example in theory of a Bermudian who had worked for a company for over twenty years and, although he felt that he had contributed to the success and prosperity of the company, the company felt he had been well paid and was not due anything extra. The caller then asked his fellow caller how he would feel if he did not benefit in some way for the role he played in helping the company to reach that point. The message to me is clear and is one with which I agree. While, there may be an argument that we owe non-Bermudians nothing, there are intangibles that have to be considered.

How do we measure the contributions that non-Bermudians have made in many ways that have resulted in us achieving the high level of prosperity that is ours to enjoy? Madam Minister, many speak of the Long-Term Resident issue as if it were a one-way street. How many Bermudians have taken the opportunity to live and work in foreign countries? How many of us, as Bermudians, have gone abroad for several years, and in some cases, never returned except for vacations? How many of our sons and daughters have gone away for their college or university education and decided to live and work abroad? We recognize that many of these choices may have been made out of frustration with the employment situation in Bermuda, but not all. Is it not a fact that some Bermudians have declined to return even when offered prime positions? Many of us, who are Bermudians by birth, speak of our rights proudly. However, no matter how far we can trace our Bermudian family tree, we all are descendants of someone from some other place on earth. As we consider this matter of Long-Term Residents, let us ponder and be guided by how we would have handled the immigration issues in the past as it would have affected our parents, grand-parents and other ancestors that came to this country. It is because of those original "Long-Term Residents'' that we are Bermudians.

The issue of Long-Term Residents must be resolved, but, in the heat and emotion, let us not forget the more important matter of ensuring that future immigration policies are made and followed to ensure that Bermudians can feel confident that there is the broadest range possible of job and career opportunities available with a continued high standard of living.

CHARLES H. JEFFERS Pembroke War vets were ignored September 11, 2000 Dear Sir, As a war veteran, I was invited to attend the function at the King Edward VII Memorial Hospital on September 6, 2000. I waited with some pleasure for the news on September 7 of the unveiling of the plaque of the War Veterans Wing.

All I saw was Dr. Ewart Brown presenting a eulogy for the late Dr. E.F.

Gordon. Dr. Gordon may have fought for the working man. We the war veterans fought for the liberty of the whole world.

H.F.S.

Paget