Shape of things to come

March 31, 2002

Dear Sir,

I think at the end the day few people cared that the 'christian' ceremony for the new ferry was a private function, we saw it on the news and that's good enough of me. The other issues which surround our new ferry service will only be realised over the course of the years of come.

Will we use the service as an alternate means of transportation? I hope so, because the continued increase of motor cars clogging the roads is not only unhealthy for us all but has a negative impact on our tourism appeal. How can we market our Island as a peacefully getaway with bumper to bumper traffic?

Most of us understand that the fast ferry service is an attempt to combat this problem, a bandaid over a broken bone, but what can our leaders do, start prohibiting people from owning cars. I don't think any politician would consider that and expect to be re-elected, not even Dr. Brown who went out on a limb for us, but I maybe wrong; let's see.

If someone said 'I can cut our traffic congestion in half' and presented a reasonable solution, we should all support that proposal because a solution to our traffic problems will help Bermuda redevelop its image relating to our tourism woes.

I think we have to look at the fact that in order for the public transportation system to work we have to be 'force fed'; put some 'sugar' in mix Mr. Minister and we will eat it up and then come back and ask for more.

Bermuda can once again return as a leader industry. We invented it while other countries were still growing bananas and sugar cane. We should be the destination of choice. If you think the fast ferries were, expensive wait till you see what it will cost for our own airline because that's what its going to take – as well as some of Tony B's Casinos.

All in the family

March 22, 2002

Dear Sir,

My father George used to have an expression: "In life there are three ways to do things. The right way, the wrong way and the army way."

This current, one sided, discussion about constitutional change, through the Boundaries Commission, could do with some army logic. I, of course, have absolutely no problem with the concept of one person, one vote, of equal value.

Here is my suggestion. The Commission should decide whom exactly our MP's represent. All the people, those that vote, those that vote for them, none of the above.

Being reasonably charitable, I will assume that their decision will be either, all of the people 60,000, or all of the voters 30,000. In either case, the number thirty would be a good match for the total MP's.

How to divide this up would be quite simple. If all the people, start at Dockyard and count out blocks of 2,000, drawing a line between each constituency. If all the registered voters the same process will apply, counting out 1,000 voters and draw a line. Any overplus would be given to the Society of Non-Mariners .

Unfortunately, George forgot the fourth, or Bermudian way of doing things. I like to use the expression "discombobulation".

Any changes will have to be voted into law by Parliament, as it is presently constituted, with ten MPs voting themselves out of a job. Also family groupings which have taken years to develop, may be disrupted. Up here in Sandys we have Cox, Cox, Lister, Lister, Lister and in their heyday the Roberts family. Just suppose that all the Cox's and Listers' were in one constituency, and all of my cousins were in another. You can assume that the MP's who have lost their job will be pretty upset. Just imagine all the voters, who currently have two votes, which they love to split. One for their party and one for their friend.

I only go to funerals of people that are related; friends and foes and those I respect. A few years ago I had a run of funerals in my family. It must have been a bad month for Bailey's Bay because I kept meeting the same MP. On questioning him, the reply was so Bermudian. "If anyone dies in my Parish I go to their funeral."

Architects draw line

March 28, 2002

Dear Sir,

I would like to respond to Mr. Gauntlett's letter. Firstly I would like to thank you Jack for the compliment about the "Compass Point" building. It was a pleasure to work on it and I too am very pleased with the result.

Next I would like to discuss the body of your letter. The article which prompted your letter was not an effort to place architects on a pedestal above others. The article was written by a lady journalist who called me (as President of the Institute of Bermuda Architects) and asked a simple question "What qualifications and experience are required to offer architectural services? " My short, one word answer of "none" surprised her and she naturally continued with more questions.

My comments were reasonably accurately reported and if you reread the article in a more dispassionate way, you will realise that I was only spelling out the difference between an architect (spelled with a capital or lower case "a") and someone who isn't an architect and is not entitled to use the title.

The journalist's questions, as it turned out, were part of an ongoing research she was undertaking which centred around the continuing controversy which is currently in the public eye, one in which the term "architect" is used with the same colloquial abandon used by the general public.

My colleagues and I are not trying to put anyone out of business. We are seeking to have the public made aware that by hiring a registered architect, there is at least a line of redress if complaints are made. We simply want the profession of architecture to be protected and the public protected. From whom you may ask – just read the newspaper.

Finally, I would say that you are doing yourself a great disservice by suggesting that this article you refer to was part of some "grand design" lobbying campaign. Your letter and currently reported news items are more than enough to give support to our long standing desire for the proper recognition of the qualified architect.

I am not going to reply to any further letters to the Editor regarding my interview in . Please call me personally if you have any further need to question my motives.

Double standards

March 22, 2002

Dear Sir,

I have read numerous letters in your editorial section plus articles in the newspapers, and I, too, commend Michael Dunkley for his outspokenness regarding the highly publicised BHC issues.

When we hear of situations concerning individuals such as Paul Young, we definitely see proof that it's not so much what you know, but who you know when it comes to opportunities on this island.

What did happen to the Bermudians who may have expressed an interest in any of these projects? Were they unwilling to play by the rules of the game (i.e. alleged corruption)?

Don't be surprised if this issue doesn't get dragged on, with the hopes that the public will forget about it, then eventually be brushed under the carpet. Let's face it, this does happen.

Look at previous situations involving certain Police officers. There are definitely double standards depending on the department/rank/individual concerned. For instance, when persons high up (i.e. managers) are mentioned in any scandal, certain precautionary measures are speedily put into place to protect them, however, when you are of an insignificant rank (worker), they are quick to penalise, even before anything has been proven.

Suspension with pay, (manager in one department responsible for BHC activities) vs dismissal, arrest, forced resignation attempt, pay discontinued immediately for simply showing up to work (staff member in another department).

Michael Dunkley, I say keep up the pressure, we deserve an honest account of how our taxpaying dollars are being spent.

With regard to the headline involving Terrance Smith, paying particular attention to the BPSU General Secretary, Ed Ball's comments, I have to question who he represents, the employer or the worker. In most instances his responses seem to defend the employers' rights. I think the BPSU members should wake up and pay attention. They now have a new president, a new name for their union, and should possibly consider a new General Secretary.

If you are going to continue paying dues, it's time to start demanding representation on behalf of the workers. The present General Secretary seems to have gone astray for whatever reason, and appears to be very selective in who he wants to fight for. Based on his repeated comments on radio/television broadcasts and print media, its quite obvious he favours the employer.

On that note BPSU members, I urge you to wake up and smell the coffee, the 'u' was put in that acronym for a reason...it's up to 'u' to make the change.

Time for PLP changes

March 25, 2002

Dear Sir,

In light of the accusations of corruption, kickbacks, and greed affecting at least one Government organisation, I declare that Bermuda is now over qualified for full CARICOM membership.

This revelation coupled with increased borrowing, overspending, and irrational slowdowns in critical processes (inactive boards and over-analysis of work permit applications) have eroded my confidence in Government integrity. After briefly living on a Caricom island nation, I found that similar legislative abominations are accepted as common practice to our Caricom comrades.

Dishonesty and abuse of power is unacceptable, especially when servants of the people are missing my tax contributions to the Government. I'll wait till the next general election to vent my frustrations in full if sweeping changes are not made.

The PLP must change their style of governing to remain true to their name – Progressive. They must immediately identify and get rid of the unsavoury characters associated with the party. A PLP operation clean sweep is way overdue. Even the appearance of impropriety must be avoided.

The PLP must remove the radical/rebels of the 60's era and allow the best-qualified MPs to lead the party back from the brink of self-destruction. I would rather hear counsel on important legal issues concerning the country, rather than be subjected to off-base comments concerning Canadian lawyers.

There are many professional, well educated, intelligent, level headed, resourceful backbench MPs that must be considered as suitable replacements for those that cling to the 'old guard' philosophy of the past.

The vets have had their chance to lead. Now they must be made to follow the smarter, less controversial MPs, or just get out of the way altogether, before it's to late. Any action short of this and the PLP Government will be remembered as a one-term wonder.

If right thinking party supporters do not challenge the way the PLP is being run, the existing power players will run the PLP, and the country into the ground.

Welcome to Caricom.