We?ll have to build up

July 26, 2006

Dear Sir,

These are my thoughts on a couple of topical issues presently dominating discussions in Bermuda. I am an expatriate worker who has been in Bermuda since 2000. My impression so far is that the average Bermudian (particularly black Bermudian) is generally satisfied with the performance of the governing PLP, but desires improvement in two key areas. These two areas are the government?s handling of crime and the housing situation. Any political party which wants to remain in power ought to know that, separate and apart from economic empowerment for the masses, those are two important issue that one would want to keep on top of if one wants to improve the odds of one?s party being re-elected for a further term in office. Most Bermudians are also uncomfortable with the government?s stance on the topic of independence.

With regards to the Independence issue, while I understand Government?s reasons for pursuing Independence, and while I have no doubt that the Premier (and his Cabinet) has noble intentions, my only fear is that Bermuda might end up like one of those other islands that opted for independence in the 60s and 70s. I am from one of those islands and I have witnessed first-hand, how corruption, greed and nepotism in government (post-independence) has lead to the demise of my own country. I have witnessed with my own eyes what can result from unfettered access to power by governments in newly independent states. In addition, if one simply compares the performance of those countries that opted for independence, with that of islands that are still dependencies, one will tend to realise that the economies of the dependencies are generally doing better than those of the countries that opted for independence. That?s all I have to say on that matter.

I will not address the crime issue (for my own personal reasons) however I will attempt to offer a suggestion as to how the present housing shortage/crisis might be addressed, in accordance with government?s sustainable development objective. On reading the recent Sustainable Development Summary, I see where it states that in 2000, 48 percent (nearly half) of all Bermudians did not own their own homes. This is further compounded by the fact that a 2005 study found that 22 percent (almost a quarter) of Bermudian households on lower incomes spend 60 percent (over half) or more of their income on housing needs. These figures are quite significant, especially in a recognised First World Country. It is my humble belief that these statistics are unacceptable, given Bermuda?s economic power. The bottom-line is (as all of us are aware) that more and more Bermudians have to be paying exorbitant rents/mortgages and many Bermudians do not even entertain the hope of, or desire to eventually owning their own home. This is true even where couples have a combined salary to work with, but it is a much worse reality for single individuals (even with multiple jobs). This depressing picture is sad, especially in a country that ranks so high on the UN?s official list of developed countries.

I will not go into the reasons why rents and the cost (to Bermudians) of owning a home in their own country are so exorbitant because I am sure most of us have some idea of the factors which contribute to this state of affairs. I will however attempt to address how the present government can possibly help to make home ownership a reality for more Bermudians. It is no secret that Bermuda?s land mass is very limited. This is an inescapable fact. As a result, there are not a lot of available open spaces on which to build. This is the main factor that drives up property costs/prices. This phenomenon is explained by simple economics. Where there is a scarcity of a particular resource, coupled with a corresponding high demand, prices will invariably be driven upwards. Market forces also determine how high these prices are driven.

Without government intervention now, the prospect of the average Bermudian being able to own a home in his/her own country will be just as daunting ten or even 20 years down the road, as it is now. Apart from other initiatives (which I will not go into now because of time and space constraints), I believe that Government should seriously consider investing in affordable, high-rise apartment complexes (maybe up to six storeys high) with apartments that might cost prospective homeowners a subsidised cost of say between $300,000 to $350,000 each. It is my belief that these would be more affordable to Bermudians that what presently obtains.

While the average Bermudian would not be used to high-rise living, they would eventually get used to the idea and might even grow to like it. Let face it, with Bermuda?s lack of available building space; Bermudians are left with very few options, except to build upwards. Look at it this way, with high-rise apartment complexes like I have described, at least more Bermudians would have a realistic chance of owning their own homes, which would otherwise be out of their reach, since contemporary houses cost anywhere from $850,000 upwards, which is a prohibitive cost to many. As Mayor Bluck (a strong proponent of high-rise living) said the other day, these apartment complexes do not necessarily have to detract from, interfere with or spoil the quaintness or beauty of Bermuda. As long as they are built in the appropriate sites, there shouldn?t be a problem.

I believe that this is one of the ways in which home ownership could be placed within the reach of, and become a reality for many more Bermudians, without placing too much pressure on the environment. This would of course be in-sync with the government?s sustainable development objective, as it relates to the provision of affordable housing for Bermudians. Such an initiative might even guarantee the governing party winning ballots in the next general elections (assuming it satisfactorily addresses not only the housing crisis, but also other social issues as well).

Observing Police

July 19, 2006

Dear Sir,

Driving from the western Parishes early mornings on two occasions in the last couple of months I have come across a number of police pulling vehicles over doing checks. What never ceases to amaze me is that they are out in full force first thing in the morning doing checks but where are they at night when people are being shot, stabbed, and beat up? Police need to be more virulent at night especially around the night spots of the city not first thing in the morning when people are innocently making their way to work.

On another note last evening around 7.30 p.m. I was swimming with my cousin and her husband at Long Bay Beach in Sandy?s. There was a young gentleman standing in the water at one end ?of the not so nice part of the beach? running his remote control boat causing no problems, doing something constructive and not interfering with anyone. We were swimming at the nicer side of the beach so he was not interfering with us and there was no one else in the water swimming.

Two police officers approached him saying you have to stop because we have had a complaint of the noise and people swimming. The noise was bearable because it was not a continuous noise just a couple of seconds while the boat ran then it would cut out and he would start it up again run it then it would cut out and so on, as we know that?s how these little boats run it is not continuous. This young gentleman was very good about it he just packet it in, but you could not help but feel sorry for him because he was doing absolutely nothing wrong. Common sense I am sure would have been used if he saw there were people swimming or enjoying the beach but that was not the case in the instance.

No wonder these young men hang around the streets when you have to be told every five minutes you ?can?t do this and you can?t do that?, that?s why these young men are so frustrated with the law. I understand that if the police get a call they have to follow the instruction of that report. So the bad person here is the Police not the person that called to complain so the person that complained. GET A LIFE!

End the hypocrisy

July 26, 2006

Dear Sir,

These surely are somewhat dim times in Bermuda?s history. I?m not one for alarmist claims, but to me, there seems to be a sinister presence that has appeared on the horizon. It?s trying its best to keep some kind of control over the people of Bermuda by decrying the values of freedom (especially related to adults).

In the past few weeks, I have seen and read instances where the church has been doing it?s utmost to find ways to control people especially when it comes to private lives and in this case, the issue of the Human Rights Amendment. So much so that it is now influencing public policy as we had seen with the Mark Anderson affair and MP Renee Webb?s attempt to update the Human Rights Act. The people that are running our churches are not able to speak up on matters of race or the seriousness of the housing crisis or drive-by shootings but on matters of sexuality, they scramble like heck!

It?s as if no one is supposed to possess sexual orientation. But they only speak from a position of fear, anger and ignorance so they lash out and often times it is with venom and hatred and it appears that it has absolutely no forethought whatsoever to the consequences. That to me, Mr. Editor, is a very scary thought. The questions I ask are why is the church so hawkish on this single, lonely issue yet so silent on the plethora of other issues like racism or dubious radio shows? Maybe the church agrees with the word ?house nigger ?. And how can the church tell someone?s sexual orientation? I suppose it?s the same when one can tell if someone is of this religion or that religion. I suppose sometimes you can definitely tell a person?s sexual orientation just like you can sometimes tell what religion someone might practice. There are clear markers ? but that?s besides the point and who cares?

Now the Anglican Church is calling for the banning of women priests. Why have we all of a sudden teleported back to some Draconian timeline? The idea that women are lesser to men and should not preach is ridiculous. If that is what is stated in the bible, then the bible must be outdated, as women have now asserted themselves at the top of their fields in every facet of life, including the pulpit. Well, almost in the pulpit. If I am ever to marry a woman, is she not my partner in life? My equal? What gives?

The Church is acting like it is the only centre of decency left in the world and so it must thrust its philosophies unto everyone, especially when they are unsolicited. Maybe that?s why church numbers around the world are declining. Mr. Editor, the hypocrisy that exists in Bermuda is gargantuan. In every level of our ?decent and moral? society ( and I mean the people who claim to be decent and moral) the hypocrisy is like a disease that has taken over. They don?t have a clue as to what is happening down on the ground. On the street level, Mr. Editor, average people are trying to be good people and I really don?t think anyone needs the Church banging on about decency and morality when we all know what is happening behind closed doors in these places.

Infiltrate the gangs

July 24, 2006

Dear Sir,

Another shooting on Sunday morning July 23, 2006, another young person died; violence took him away prematurely. We have a serious problem in Bermuda and the Government needs to wake up and take severe action. Government Ministers don?t have guts. Some are making excuses that the ?young adults? involved in these gang related incidents may be a result of a lack of upbringing; or having low self esteem; or having the feeling that they are a failure in society. This is a crutch, an excuse to put the blame elsewhere, rather on the individuals themselves. Everybody has a choice to do the right thing or the wrong thing. These young adults chose the life style they lead. A choice they made and they do not care about the consequences.

Do you honestly believe that asking the public to get involved is going to work? Let?s face the facts here. Anyone who gets involved risks the chance of becoming a target. From past events on the Island, it would appear that the philosophy you are dealing with is ?an eye for eye tooth for a tooth?. The Island is dealing with vigilante justice. So I ask you, who is going to give information? Why isn?t there an undercover police operation as in other countries to infiltrate the gangs and bring them to justice? What does it take to bring the police into the 21st century? The police elsewhere do not wait for the public to come forward; they take action.

What is it going to take to get these gangs off the streets? I?ll give you something to think about. The individuals that are involved in the shootings are not professional marksman, they are hostile individuals, acting on their emotions that have a mission and their inexperience with guns is going to no doubt end up injuring innocent bystanders. It could be your son, daughter or grandchildren; those who are not involved in vigilante justice; those who are not involved in gang fight.

The community, no matter how hard it tries to assist by having a useless public relations demonstration with speeches and music, cannot make a law. So Government it?s up to you to step up and put procedures and harsh laws in place for these offenders who decide that they have the right to take someone else?s life or use guns. The punishment needs to fit the crime and there should be no leniency.

The PLP Government took away capital punishment and it has the power to put it back on the books. Maybe then, these young adults involved in crimes of this nature will think twice before terrorising, stabbing or shooting other individuals. Those who are terrorising each other in gang warfare are also terrorising our small community.

Blacks have benefited

July 22, 2006

Dear Sir,

It was very interesting reading Calvin Smith?s article in Wednesday?s July 19 ?Opinion? column in . I was not present at the City Hall rally when he made his speech, so can only imagine the atmosphere he must have created as a result of, what I consider to be his inflammatory remarks; they certainly didn?t seem to be of a constructive nature. Mr. Smith repeatedly refers to ?black vs white?, not ?nation vs nation? which, after all, is what The World Cup is about. I believe this is the real issue revolving around the beating of Mr. Medeiros (a Bermudian of Portuguese descent) by four other Bermudians.

For Mr. Smith?s information, in case he did not know, national pride when it involves sports events has always been prominent. Bermuda has many nationalities living and working here, so it would be normal for a person to be ecstatic over a win by their home country or, in the case of Mr. Medeiros, a win by the country from whence his forefathers probably originated. To beat this man simply because he was favouring a Portuguese team is an absolute disgrace and a totally poor reflection on our ability as Bermudians to get along together in a peaceful manner.

Although I don?t like to admit it, the expression ?Bermuda for Bermudians?, once proclaimed so passionately, is no longer apt. Perhaps Mr. Smith can remember the 1950?s (a more peaceful era), when tourism was in its heyday and Bermudians of both colours really welcomed visitors to our shores and valued their presence. This was long before we were ?catapulted into the 20th century? as a result of the 1970?s riots. Unfortunately that ?era of innocence? has disappeared forever, not only in Bermuda, but world-wide.

I?m sure Mr. Medeiros is a hard-working, law-abiding Bermudian who only wants what is best for his family, not unlike his forefathers and other Portuguese people who came here many years ago to do the work Bermudians did not want to do. They made a success of their lives through sheer hard work, determination to achieve their goals and a practice of frugality. These characteristics paid immeasurable benefits, and many of them became astute business people in the community. Let it not be said they never suffered discrimination. They did, for many, many years.

In conclusion, I would refer to Mr. Smith?s statement in the final sentence of his commentary ? ?To the extent that well-off white Bermudians are prepared to help black Bermudians attain this limited goal (of gaining access to Bermuda?s employment and construction markets), improved race relations will almost certainly result?. For his information, many black Bermudians have already benefitted in the community as a result of the action taken by whites. I refer to the sale of Bermuda General Agency and Phoenix Stores to a black Bermudian, the sale of SAL to black Bermudians, and the promotion of a black Bermudian to the position of CEO of The Bank of Bermuda. What then is to prevent ?well-off? black Bermudians from offering assistance to their race instead of ?well-off? white Bermudians, the number of whom appear to Mr. Smith to be legion? Perhaps Mr. Smith would like to approach some of these well-off black Bermudians with a view to creating a fund in his name for assisting the ?not so well off? black Bermudians. He could call it the Calvin Smith Benevolent Fund.