Look at the bigger picture

February 23, 2004

Dear Sir,

Please allow me to respond to the column entitled ?We are not immune? which appeared in today?s . Rent control needs to be reintroduced to Bermuda. Government needs to step in as they are the ones with the power. Rents border on the ridiculous. ?We are not immune? sounds as if they have their own and don?t have to rent so therefore may not fully understand the plight of those trying to get theirs.

How can anyone justify a studio apartment priced at $1,500, utilities not included, no storage and just enough space to back in and back out? I personally have been actively seeking a two-bedroom accommodation but refuse however to shell out $2,500 per month and above. Why should I solely help to pay someone else?s mortgage and help to finance their cruise around the world, when I would like to take one myself?

I, as a single parent have a good paying job and could probably afford to pay such a rent if I budget carefully, but what if there should be an emergency? I certainly won?t have the coverage. Gone are the days when you could put a little aside for a rainy day, now it seems as if there is a rainy day everyday!

I have been to view quite a few properties and I can honestly say there are some landlords who are downright greedy and greedy kills? puppy eventually. Some of the furnished places have furniture from, I swear, 1912, have no modern conveniences, patched up work, sloppy paint jobs, the list is endless and these are the landlords that want ?champagne money? for ?beer property?!

Now don?t get me wrong there are some properties that are absolutely fantastic and are worth what is being asked. If landlord A sees that landlord B is charging ?XYZ? for his property and getting away with it, why not jump on the high rent bandwagon and join the party who?s going to stop you?

Rents have gotten outrageous because they have been allowed to and the powers that be aren?t doing anything about it! Could it be because they have theirs too and are not worrying about others? I would hate to think that of those that I voted for! It always seems as if those that have never been in a certain situation seem to have the most advice and makes the most noise.

I?m not saying ?We are not immune? can?t express their opinion but they need to look at the bigger picture and realise that if rents were indeed more affordable:

1. We wouldn?t have families being split up until suitable accommodation is found;

2. We wouldn?t have over 100 families on the waiting list at Housing Corporation;

3. We wouldn?t have people sleeping in cars; and

4. Our children who by the way are our future going hungry because there isn?t enough change left over after paying our ?affordable rent? to buy food for lunches to take to school or having to do their homework by candle light because there is no money left to pay the electricity bill.

Please wake up. Rents are high; there is no way you can deny that!

Re-evaluate Planning

February 16, 2004

Dear Sir,

I draw your attention to what is being built at Tucker?s Point, or the old Castle Harbour Hotel property. On hilltops that the environmentalists were so anxious to preserve a few years ago, instead of low profile homes that would suit the contours, there are tall, narrow, slab-sided houses that stick up like sore thumbs. They are more than reminiscent of two and three storey houses built in what might be called low-income areas where, of necessity, as much accommodation as possible is built on minimum sized lots.

While the latter may be excusable in the interest of sufficient housing, surely it should not be acceptable in high-income areas, especially where land, in effect, is being sold off by foreign owners whose objective is maximised profit, as opposed to preservation of the visual environment.

Now, the latest affront is a truly enormous, apparently three-storey supermarket or factory-sized building going up on a hilltop between the two golf courses. Only a partially blocked-in steel frame at this stage, this monstrosity will clearly dwarf everything within a mile of it. Traditional Bermudian architecture is handsome and worth maintaining. How this is to be achieved now is the problem.

Several years ago, determined to preserve various old buildings in tiny arcane detail, no effort was directed towards the larger objective of the future survival of Bermuda?s architectural heritage as a whole by applying traditional proportions and rough character details to influence future construction.

Instead, there was an esoteric fixation on replicating, for example, a rotted window in an existing house, rather than preventing some non-traditional monstrosity being built next door. A short drive between Devil?s Hole and the Harrington Sound Post Office is an example of the results of myopic focusing on tiny details of the past, while entirely ignoring what the future, all around us, would and now does look like. This failure is exemplified by what is going on at Tucker?s Point, and what is now swamping our traditional architecture, unless some redirection of effort and attention is brought about before it is too late.

Don?t be fooled

February 23, 2004

Dear Sir,

It seems that the Minister of Tourism and the Ministry itself, to a lesser extent, has gone on the offensive with positive media campaigns lately. Don?t be conned into believing that simply because there has been discussion on new marketing campaigns, the implementation of the Ettenberg report, the release of encouraging exit polls, the advent of new flights coming to the island and a an overall euphoric feeling regarding the projected strength of the industry for 2004.

The proof in the pudding will be the results for the year so we can only view this as a course of action which should be occurring. I am not saying that these events should not be construed as positive, just bear in mind that this kind of posturing has always happened at this time of year and we can only be encouraged at a later date when these actions bear fruit. So Bermuda, don?t sit back in your comfort zone and get too elated as nothing yet has contributed to the resurgence of tourism to the benefit of your various businesses and to Bermuda Inc.

Why raise fares?

January 24, 2004

Dear Sir,

If the proposed budget is supposed to ensure that the ?haves? still have and the ?have nots? have more, then why raise the cost of taking public transportation? This amounts to a regressive tax wherein the ?have nots? are taxed more than the ?haves?. The ?haves? don?t take the bus to work. Car registration costs are raised under the budget as an incentive to use public transport which was also raised.

To achieve the desired result, why not freeze the public transport costs and raise car registration and licensing by a proportionate amount in order to make up for the shortfall in public transportation? It may not be the most popular or politically savvy move, however, it does honestly address the problem of congestion on our roads and benefits those who elect to use public transportation as well as those who financially have no other choice.

A positive development

February 20, 2004

Dear Sir,

What good news for women in our community searching for alcohol and drug treatment ? a rebuilt Fair Haven is set to reopen and a special grant has been awarded in the 2004 budget to the National Drug Commission for women?s treatment. Finally, the public and private sector are showing evidence of working together to serve the needs of alcohol and drug dependent women. The relationship with Bellwood Health Services Inc. is long overdue in a transparent effort to ensure excellent recovery services for women both here and overseas.

The impact of this effort will not only benefit the addicted women in our community, it will have a direct benefit on their dependent children. I understand that the 33 women who presented for treatment at Fair Havens in 2002 had a total of 52 children. I look forward to hearing more about this positive development.