own.

Bermuda architecture, while it has incorporated elements from all around the world, is truly unique. It is a part of our heritage, gives insight into the Island's history and contributes to the Bermudian character. It is something we all share.

As such, it should be preserved. Much has already been done in this direction.

Trusts and individuals have have taken over properties and preserved them and Government has also preserved buildings and through building codes, tried to establish a framework for maintaining the Bermuda style of architecture while allowing it to develop and grow.

But until now, there has never been a mechanism to prevent an owner from demolishing or radically altering a building of either architectural or historical importance. In the past, Bermuda has lost a number of properties which should have been saved. The fact they are now lost forever is to Bermuda's eternal shame.

The creation of mandatory listed buildings is basically the right decision, because few people would willingly list their homes voluntarily.

Some will argue that you have the right to do what you want with your own property. But we already accept restrictions on building in Bermuda through zonings which are essential if Bermuda's environment, economy and lifestyle are to be preserved. But a person who owns a piece of property in the heart of Hamilton stands to benefit far more than the owner of a piece of arable land.

Most people accept this as the price you pay for your lifestyle, unfair as it sometimes seems.

Building owners who have either had the good fortune to inherit a historic building or have chosen to buy one must accept that this carries some responsibility as well. What is difficult for owners to accept are the stringent requirements restricting them from adding on to their homes while requiring them to maintain them in the traditional Bermuda style, which can be very expensive.

To make this scheme work, the people who are listed must have a stake in it.

Among the ideas which gave been floated are proposals for land tax relief or the creation of a restoration fund from land tax revenues which could then be drawn on by owners of listed homes for maintenance.

It would be unfair if the very wealthy were to get "restoration money'', but it would seem to be reasonable for Government to look at a system whereby the less well-off could be eligible for grants to bridge the gap between a standard repair and one which would enable them to meet the listing requirements.

In this way, the building owner would not be unfairly burdened while the buildings would be kept up. Funding could be proved via land tax which all landowners would contribute to. In that way, the burden of listed buildings would be spread throughout the community: after all, we all benefit from having them -- and no-one would wish to see them lost or neglected to the point of collapse.