Answering questions

February 5, 2008

Dear Sir,

I don't know everything there is to know about the PATI proposal, but in reading the daily regarding the questions of Justice Ian Kawaley, would this proposal have alleviated the Government's ability to withhold answering questions regarding the mold at CedarBridge?

JUST WONDERING

Southampton

MPs' comatose reactions

February 3, 2008

Dear Sir,

A few days ago The Royal Gazette asked Members of Parliament if they supported the idea of a public access to information law.

Only one member of our Progressive Labour government said, "Yes", another "Not sure" and "Possibly" ¿ the rest they were able to contact said: "No comment." Now, we wonder why they are afraid to speak? Surely elected officials must have a point of view rather than appearing like lifeless, apathetic, tongue-tied intellects. More bluntly, there is no such thing as being half pregnant! You are or you are not!

This is not an attempt to score points and should not be viewed as a political assault on the Government but as a 'right to know' what the future has in store for us. There are some 'behind closed door decisions made' which are not good for all concerned and need to be challenged.

A perfect example of a call for a review on an outmoded organisation came recently from Minister Dale Butler. He, in fact, threatened to bring in legislation to overhaul the Corporation of Hamilton altogether, declaring its rules and ordinances "outdated".

We agree with his observation, however, it is somewhat of an oxymoron comment if you compare it to his answer of 'no comment' when he was asked if he supported the idea of PATI. The point, you can't have it both ways.

There is a vital distinction between a "right to know" and an autocratic state, and it is most disturbing when some in the community, project a comatose reaction when we look for answers. These people may as well hang a sign around their neck, D. N. R. (Do not resuscitate).

TOPPY AND SAUNDRA COWEN

Kelowna, British Columbia

'Indigenous' defined

February 4, 2008

Dear Sir,

Laverne Furbert's letter of February 4 has had me double checking my dictionary for the definition of "indigenous". My goodness, I thought, I've been mistaken for all these years! Thankfully my education was indeed correct, confirmed by not one, but two dictionaries (just in case).

"Indigenous" means: originating in or occurring naturally in a particular place; native. That being the case, can you please explain how you come to the conclusion that you are indigenous within the same sentence as 'wewere brought here'?

On another point, I think Mr. Barnett would completely agree with you that those who work in the hotels, taxi industry, clean the streets, etc. should, and do, feel proud of their Bermuda and have earned the right to feel a sense of entitlement to a return on their investment of hard work.

Perhaps it is those young Bermudians who aren't prepared to work yet seek those same returns that he was addressing?

CB

Southampton

Let the world know

February 2, 2008

Dear Sir,

I'm not trying to sound funny or anything, but Mr. Burrows might think of something like America's Most Wanted: Kidnappers.

I'm not sure if they have something like that, but CrimeStoppers might not be able to help in this serious matter.

If this woman is in the States with your son, you're going to need people overseas to be on the lookout for her (put a picture of her on TV plus a possible picture of how your son might look like today).

HOPING

Pembroke

Silence is golden

February 2, 2008

Dear Sir,

In days gone by, Bermuda was a relatively peaceful place to live. The increase in traffic over the past 20 years has altered this, and there is little hope of changing things back.

However, the situation would be helped if drivers refrained from letting friends know that they are alive and well by leaning on their horn. A simple wave of the hand is a good indication that your heart is still pumping.

Yours giving up tooting for Lent,

ANDREW R. DOBLE

Hamilton Parish