Mixed messageJanuary 5, 2011Dear Sir,As I was reviewing the Sports section (Football men and women of the year) I couldn’t help in noticing on opposite pages of this particular newspaper had been a write-up referring to how/why Kyle Lightbourne was handed a hefty fine as well as a suspension for “unprofessional behaviour towards officials” (to put it mildly) back in October, 2010 … Then on the opposite page he was accredited for his “greatness”.My point is this: ”What’s the message that’s being conveyed to the youth”?SPORTS FANSt. George’sGet the ball in the holeJanuary 5, 2011Dear Sir,One of the tricks of the trade of the late unlamented Brown government was the use of pompous and vague language often employed by self-important people to make it seem as though they were doing Very Important Things without actually accomplishing much what we used to call “fullishness”. One thing they often did was to “address” issues rather than actually solve problems. Now, when golfers address a golf ball, they just look at it; they don’t actually hit the ball, much less knock it straight towards the hole. When someone addresses a letter or an envelope, it just signifies their intent to send it to someone; it doesn’t mean they actually mail the item to the recipient. Speakers address an audience to talk about some matter or other, but they aren’t actively doing anything except talking about the subject.I’m not against addressing things, including issues. Clearly a problem, or a letter or any matter to hand has to be “addressed” as a preliminary stage before doing what needs to be done to complete its objective. The problem is with people who think, or try to convince you that they are actually doing something just by “addressing” it. They aren’t; they’re deliberating, at best, or, at worst, procrastinating or prevaricating or some other such fullishness.We don’t elect our representatives in Government merely to “address” issues: to stand over the ball on the tee and stare at its dimples and wobble their legs, trying to wink at the ball and keep their heads still, thinking about keeping the ball on the fairway or even making a hole in one. We elect them to strike that ball and get on with playing the full 18 holes and, if possible, try to stay out of the bunkers or the casuarinas. We elect them to get the ball in the hole, however many strokes it takes. That’s the only way the people the electorate can mark the cards of their Government at the completion of each hole and of the full term of the game. And when they’ve done that, and the scores are all totted up and signed and pinned on the notice board (or whatever they do with golf score cards), it will be the people who will address their verdict to their Government - in the form of a ballot paper at the next election.GRAHAM FAIELLALondon, UKMoniz’s sour grapesJanuary 5, 2011Dear Sir,I am writing in regards to the article in today’s paper about the comments made by Trevor Moniz. Mr. Moniz’s comments seem to me as if he is mad at the BDA members for not rejoining with the UBP.It seems as if he (Mr. Moniz) has realised that it is fractionally impossible for the BDA to win power at any upcoming elections. What Mr. Moniz fails to realise is that these members made a choice, a choice to leave the UBP, a choice which he must accept. He must be able to grasp the fact that the BDA leader (Mr Cannonier) is just emphasising that his members are fine where they are and they don’t want to leave.He (Mr Cannonier) is letting everyone know that the BDA is not a branch of the UBP and rather their own party. Mr. Moniz’s comments were wrong and callous to say that Mr. Cannonier was being arrogant. He was simply sticking up for the members of his party.Like they say “You Dont Miss The Water, Till the well runs dry”.ERON HILLBermuda InstituteSupport this causeJanuary 6, 2011Dear SirThere are many families in Bermuda whose lives have been impacted by serious, chronic and life-altering diseases. There is no difference whether the disease is widespread and shared among many versus one that may impact only a small number among us. But the level of support and the access to information can be very different when you are one of the few.Multiple Sclerosis is a diseases that impacts sufferers in different ways and none of them are good. There are estimated to be less than 60 people in Bermuda suffering from Multiple Sclerosis and how they are able to deal with it depends greatly on insurance, information and their support structure. There is no cure and we don’t know why some get it and others don’t but there are medicines that can help sufferers live a decent life. Those medicines are very expensive...in most cases, in excess of $2,500 per month.The Multiple Sclerosis Society of Bermuda is a very small group who try to raise money to support those who need help. All of the funds that we raisego towards the costs of medication for those in need. Remember, even if an MS sufferer has insurance, the patient portion is in excess of $500 monthly!My family has been impacted by Multiple Sclerosis and I’m asking for the public’s support in my effort to raise funds for this cause. I walk for exercise but even my best friends would not mistake me for Jim Butterfield! But I’m going to walk in the International 10K walk on Saturday, January 15 along with my wife, Barbara and my daughter Allison, and every step will be made to raise funds to support MS sufferers in Bermuda. I have already asked most of my friends for their support and the level of generosity has been absolutely incredible.If you’d like to support me please just send your cheque, payable to the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Bermuda, to me at 4 Rebecca Road, Southampton SN04. If you want to contact me, my email is mandalay[AT]transact.bmJOHN FAIELLASouthamptonPolitical malaiseDear Sir,I wrote a comment following my observation on our political malaise. I made the recommendation for all the parliamentarians to merger and consolidate within the PLP to foster the political transition from the current fossilised partisanship war which has polarised the community from its inception. If the response to my recommendation as expressed by persons whom I would be inclined to respect is an indication of popular opinion, any transition or reform will be very, very, slow.The Warwick by-election was not just an indication that the opposition is split. The indication is what I have been saying for a number of years now; it is hopelessly split. Even if united they are too weak to capture the same amount of seats in the previous general election. That constituency of support will go to their tombs’ before realising that it is a social phenomenon at work, not a political one.The wind is in the sails of the PLP just as the wind was in the sails of the UBP for 40 years. This same wind means any reform or evolution will occur from within the PLP for the foreseeable future. The UBP has had 12 years to figure the direction which the country needed to evolve. It is still commiserating over its own past, self-absorbed in its own thoughts of righteousness, unable to see that even if for some incalculable reason they were able to eclipse a political victory, the game of politics would render the victory worthless. The country would lose and suffer with yet another round of miserable division and polarisation, suspicions and a host of what we already know that has poisoned our society.The question is how do we get from the present party politics to something that gives the same level of legislative scrutiny along with proper political representation for all the electorate? We have all heard people say we should ban party politics. I don’t think we can, however I think we can do so by working through what we have. The PLP was formed initially out of an era and a protest movement against an elite group who controlled the island economically and politically. The idea and vision expressed was that of a democracy and not another elite through the mechanism of a party construct. I would argue that intrinsically the PLP mandate is to democratise the Island. I know that the UBP and now BDA will argue the same objective. When we allow our imagination a little courtesy and squeeze all the labels and attachments out of the equation it would be easy to amend the constitution of the PLP to accommodate all of Bermuda. Make the rights and privilege of the current party as the law of the land. We have that already in labour were workers rights (formerly BIU rights) are now the law of the land. If for some reason a PLP person would object to a full merger giving everyone the same rights, I would have to ask the question…what was your struggle for? Was it that you believed in a struggling to achieve the good for everyone, or was that just the rhetoric, when the real game is to preserve the opportunity to have a sole crack at the pie? It would be a genius and true reversal of history if the PLP could move the country in the direction were they would have delivered their mandate of democratization to all the people of Bermuda. They can’t do that unilaterally they would need the participation of all the parties.We would have to reform the rules of the party to be compatible with the interest of the entire community. It can be done and it is in our interest as well as the interest of similar jurisdiction around the world to move in this direction. If the rights of all the people can be made to be the same, what is the difference between a one party state and a no party state? I’ll ask another difficult question; what’s the difference between half a dozen and six? Playing host to this current Westminster style of “winner takes all” is the political game that inherently caters to special interest. Unfortunately not too much intellectual honesty can be expected from people who seek to benefit from what this kind of grab the ball and run as far as you can before you get caught system. Nor as it seems can there be any help from those who are hood winked into believing that if we can change the colours of our jersey it will effects the level of play and the nature of the game. Hopefully if the debate emerges I could speak to the kinds of people’s rights and legislative model that would be ideal.Ps for those who say..”Didn’t he try to start another party”…you missed all the preamble…. I was trying to amass an unassailable majority at the time and thought that by the UBP disappearing there would have been a considerable cross support. That not being possible, the PLP predictably now have a virtual unassailable majority. When you look at the PLP support without jaundiced eyes or those wishing and hoping eyes, the kinds and numbers of people I have seen who have thrown their support to the PLP is too staggering a loss to any opposition for them to come back any time soon and far out ways any grumbling amongst PLP supporters.KHALID AL-WASICity of Hamilton