Honour Jim Butterfield

March 6, 2009

Dear Sir,

Considering how much he and his family have contributed to sport in Bermuda, I think the National Stadium should be named after Jim Butterfield. And don't worry that such an honour is usually bestowed posthumously – by the time it gets finished we'll all be dead and buried. Yours on the home straight.

ANDREW R. DOBLE

Hamilton Parish

Give respect to all

March 7, 2008

Dear Sir,

I'm concerned about the respect that this island is giving one another. On the road some people won't wait two seconds to let a car out of their own driveway; people will overtake and speed past teenagers that are just starting out on a bike. This has gone too far for me. On the first week I got my bike I was so nervous about those who would speed around me. I had a car overtake when I was about to turn into my driveway.

I had my indicator on and I put my hand out to signal that I was going to turn. This jerk beeped and two seconds later overtook me! If I didn't hear it I would have been in the back seat of his pimped out red car. Ever since I have been scared out of my mind riding to school or to my boyfriend's house because of all these jerks who think that they own the streets and feel invincible.

They aren't! If someone you know likes to speed and you know that they don't respect the roads then sign them up for motocross it's a lot cheaper than taking someone's life. Also for the police officers where is the respect in that? They are just doing their job so that they can make this island safer for me and you. If you give them respect then that is what you will get in return.

All those jerks who think that they don't need to listen to the "man" you better think again because when you're older and you have kids what do you think this island is going to be like for them growing up? It's already hard enough as it is. Why not make this island real paradise? Just give respect!

CONCERNED EIGHTEEN-YEAR-OLD

Pembroke

There's no 'Turkey Lane'

March 5, 2008

Dear Sir,

Please permit me to use your Letters to the Editor column to ask what idiot has been wandering around the ancient streets of St. George's changing the names of lanes and alleys.

I have lived within the town all my life and I first noticed that someone at some point decided to rename 'Needle and Thread Alley' to 'Turkey Lane' about four or five years ago, despite the fact that the sign at the entrance to this lane still reads 'Needle and Thread Alley' and has done for the last 50 years.

Now I was shocked to find a few days ago that the lower half of 'Printer's Alley' (the part that is on the Eastern side of Queen Street) has been renamed 'No Name Lane'. It is now marked with a large and ugly sign that is completely out of character with the town's image. Did someone from the Corporation of St. George or Government go wandering about the town looking for something to name in order to fulfil their need to feel important?

I will tell you and other St. Georgians will tell you, that there is no 'Turkey Lane', but there is a 'Needle And thread Alley'. 'Needle and Thread Alley' joins Turkey Hill to Printers Alley. There is not a 'No Name Lane' but there is a 'Printer's Alley'. 'Printer's Alley' begins at the eastern end of 'Nea's Alley' runs around the corner past Wainwright House, passes "Stockdale" (the old home of the printer), continuing through Queen Street, passing to the south of "Poinciana" and ending at its junction with 'Broad Alley'.

The oversized and ugly sign attached to the lamp post in front of the "Old Rectory" doesn't make for a very nice picture of the much photographed entrance to the "Old Rectory". Can someone remove this sign before I have to pull it down myself?

Do I now have to walk around the town to ensure that some "out-a-towner" or someone with self-importance syndrome hasn't changed the name of streets that were named hundreds of years ago?

BORN AND BRED ST. GEORGIAN

St. George's

Has Burch jumped the gun?

February 23, 2008

Dear Sir,

I wish to respond to a couple of statements made by Labour, Home Affairs and Housing Minister, Senator David Burch, as reported in Friday's (February 22, 2008) issue of The Royal Gazette.

Firstly, Senator Burch came up with this grand idea of holding parents responsible for the wrongs of their children. It all sounds very nice and may even appear to be a workable idea to many, but there are many underlying pitfalls.

This is not the first time this idea has been mooted. Look around the various legal systems within the British Commonwealth and you will find many lawmakers offering this suggestion. You will not find many examples where it has actually worked.

On the premise that Senator Burch is referring to young people under the age of 18 years (the age of majority), one must assume he is making reference to those young persons for example, between the ages of 13-17 years.

I will not go into the legal difficulties Senator Burch's suggestion presents, since Senator Burch claims he was speaking as an individual and not for Cabinet.

I would urge the Senator that even when speaking publicly for himself personally on a matter of public interest, he may do well to consult with his (government's) legal advisers prior to making statements that are heavily laced with legalities.

We all know from experience that those young persons in our society who are committing crimes are not doing so with the assistance of their parents. An overwhelming number of those law breakers are doing so despite the efforts of their parents to prevent this anti-social behaviour.

What the Minister failed to communicate to the public is what will happen to those children that cannot be controlled by their parents as are the overwhelming number of instances.

What does the government intend to do if for example a parent or parents report to the authorities that they have a 15-17 year old whom they are unable to control. Are there any provisions in place to deal with this type of situation? Should the parent(s) kill the child? Does the government have any programs in place to deal with this type of situation? Ultimately, is the government prepared to incarcerate those uncontrollable children? But isn't this the same government that previously complained and correctly so, that in the past, incarceration has been used as a first, rather than a last resort?

Senator Burch's statements make these types of situations more simplistic than they really are and in this respect, he is not doing any good for his government. He is merely creating false and non-existent solutions for situations that are really complicated. No doubt there are in our midst some irresponsible parents, but I am sure that even Senator Burch would have to admit that this number must be a very tiny minority, since for the most part, a sizable majority of the parents he has in mind, recently returned the current government to power in the face of several published reports in the press suggesting impropriety by some members of the PLP

Secondly, in the same article, Senator Burch suggested in reference to a question regarding "phone tapping", that there are "no provisions in the law to allow it." Later in the article, the Senator's answer appears to be a little bit schizophrenic. He is reported to have said: "And if I wanted to tap someone's phone, chances are someone related to that person works at the phone company, so the leakage of phones being tapped is reasonably high".

There is so much to be made of the Senator's response to the phone tapping question, but space does not permit me to speculate on the various scenarios I have in mind.

I do have to ask though if the Senator was suggesting that an inordinate number of employees of the "phone company" (at least those that would be involved in the "phone tapping" are exactly the same persons who are likely to be held responsible for the acts of their children)?

More importantly though, I find it incomprehensible that in this day and age a Minister of Government can make the statement that the law does not permit "phone tapping" (to use his language).

I am a former student who studied at a Canadian university in a related (communications) field. For anyone who cares to know, in Canada and England, annual reports are made regarding the number of electronic eavesdropping that have been carried out over the past year.

Moreover, in Canada (not sure about England) if an eavesdropping event does not provide the intelligence being sought or because it was carried out in error, the person or persons against whom the event was carried out, must be informed. I cannot think of one jurisdiction in the British Commonwealth (including Bermuda) that has a ban in place against "phone tapping".

Once again, it would appear that Senator Burch, well meaning though he may be, has jumped the gun and/or has made statements regarding issues he either knows nothing about, or has failed to direct relevant queries to the appropriate government department.

Finally, on a related note, it is my belief that although there has been some resistance from members of the community to PATI, they will in the end be grateful when/if enabling legislation is introduced, since it is a truism, that an informed public is an intelligent public.

ANTHONY LUCAS BG. BEAN

Warwick