reducing traffic on the roads, and one idea that is plain loopy.

Mr. Furbert, a former Hamilton West MP for the United Bermuda Party, says that people are getting around the one car per household rule by registering cars under assessment numbers belonging to other people and using business vehicles for their personal use, including some belonging to companies which have gone out of business.

There is no statistical evidence to back up his claims, but there is a good deal of anecdotal evidence -- you just have to walk out on the street or go to someone's house to see that the law is being abused.

It would not be that difficult for the Transport Control Department to determine where cars are being registered and whether the user actually lives at the residence.

Nor should it be too difficult for the Public Transport Vehicles Licensing Board to determine whether businesses are still functioning -- and whether the vehicle is really needed.

Mr. Furbert's other idea belongs in the dead letter file. He suggests barring expatriates, apart from chief executives or other high ranking non-Bermudians, from car ownership.

He draws a parallel with home ownership, in which non-Bermudians are barred from buying all but the top price brackets.

Mr. Furbert, who admits the idea is probably a non-starter, fails to recognise that there is a distinction between land and cars.

The risk with opening up home and land ownership to non-Bermudians is that anyone, whether they are living and working in Bermuda or not, could snap up all available land.

That is unlikely to happen with cars, as you must have a residence on the Island to buy one. And he is right to say that it would be discriminatory; few people would choose to work in Bermuda if they knew that they would never be able to own a car.

Most families would rule Bermuda out, and anecdotal evidence suggests that many single non-Bermudians ride bikes not cars at least for the first few years they are here.

So apart from being unfair and discriminatory, it might not reduce the number of cars on the road anyway.

FAIR NOTICE EDT Fair notice Some CedarBridge Academy students are complaining that 24 hours before the school's graduation ceremony, they were told they would not be able to take part.

Efforts by this newspaper to speak to school officials about the problem have not been successful; indeed, The Royal Gazette held its original story for one day because we were unable to get both sides.

It is quite right that students who have not met the requirements for graduation should not be able to take part in the event; it's not fair to other students who have done everything they were asked, and it lowers the standards of any school.

But maintaining standards also requires good management, and it is not fair to tell a student that he or she will be graduating, only to reverse the decision hours before the event takes place.

The decision of one student to "graduate himself' at the end of the ceremony was wrong, but that does not mean he was wrong to be unhappy.

Students need to know well in advance what requirements they have to complete and to let them know where they are falling short.