Census no show

July 18, 2010

Dear Sir,

Shortly after I arrived home last Friday, July 16, in the early evening, there was knock on my door. Upon opening, I learned the lady was a 2010 Census interviewer.

Now let me first say that I have no problem participating and answering the relevant questions. However, there was absolutely no notice given.

I actually had plans for the evening so I advised the lady, who was pleasant enough, that it was not a good time and asked if she could come back. She then asked me when it would be convenient for her to come back and we agreed that this evening, Sunday, July 18, 2010 at 6 p.m. would be fine.

Here it is now 6.50 p.m. and there is no sign of the interviewer. I scheduled my plans today around the 6.00 p.m. agreed time as I have a very busy life.

I believe I can speak for most if not all people in Bermuda who are going to participate in this Census in that it would be most appreciated and indeed common courtesy for an interviewer to show up when he/she says he/she will and not leave people waiting around wondering if and when he or she will actually show up!

A BERMUDIAN WITH A BUSY LIFE

City of Hamilton

The real bond issue

July 22, 2010

Dear Sir,

As most of us are now aware, The Government of Bermuda recently completed a $500 million bond issue with a ten-year maturity. The deal was handled by HSBC and yielded 2.5 percent more than the ten-year US Treasury, which is considered the risk-free benchmark. Bermuda has a credit rating of Aa2 by Moody's, and AA by S&P. Both ratings are just two levels below the highest rating of AAA that these agencies bestow on issuers of debt. We have heard Paula Cox crow about the success of this issue; it was six times oversubscribed, which in layman's terms means there were over $3 billion in orders for the $500 million issue; and, Bermuda was able to secure an historically low coupon of 5.6 percent on the bond issue. While factually correct, Ms. Cox's optimism is both misleading and misplaced. Let's look at some other facts that perhaps Ms. Cox might not want the average Bermudian taxpayer to know, if she were aware of them (which she probably isn't).

Bermuda issued its $500 million 10-year bond issue on Tuesday, July 13. The 5.6% coupon will require our Government (i.e. the taxpayer) to fork out $28 million in interest payments each year for the next ten years. That's $280 million in total interest payments on top of the $500 million in principal that will somehow need to be repaid. One day earlier, on Monday, July 12th, two other companies also issued ten-year bonds. Oracle Corporation is a software manufacturer with a credit rating of A2 Moody's, A S&P. These ratings are three levels below Bermuda's ratings, which would imply that Oracle is not as good a credit as Bermuda. Yet Oracle issued $1 billion of ten-year bonds to yield just 0.85% more than the ten-year US Treasury. Oracle's coupon was only 3.875 percent. That is the equivalent of paying $19.4 million in interest each year on a $500 million bond, or $8.6 million less than what our Government was able to secure. JP Morgan, Bank of America Merrill Lynch, and BNP Paribas handled the bond issue (no HSBC.)

Also on Monday, July 12, Equity Residential, a publicly traded US apartment landlord, issued a $600 million 10-year bond. The bond yielded 1.8 percent more than the 10-year Treasury and had a coupon of 4.75 percent. Here's the kicker; Equity Residential is rated only Baa1 by Moody's and BBB+ by S&P. These ratings are each five levels below Bermuda's, and only three levels above non-investment grade, or junk status. Yet, this company will pay the equivalent of $4.25 million less than Bermuda each year on $500 million bonds. Citigroup, Deutsche Bank, and Morgan Stanley handled Equity Residential's bond issue (again, no HSBC).

Why is it that these supposedly lower quality issuers were able to secure such better terms for their bond issues? Could it be that their finance teams are savvier than Team Cox? Could it be that their banks did a better job of properly pricing the deals? Was there a potential conflict of interest here, given local HSBC chief Philip Butterfield's connection to Premier Brown? Bermudian taxpayers should be very disturbed that Ms. Cox and our government were either unwilling or unable to secure significantly better terms on our $500 million bond issue. Perhaps there was so much interest in our deal because HSBC priced it too cheaply. As a taxpayer, I would have been far happier if the deal had been only two times oversubscribed but had a coupon of, say, 4.60 percent. That would have saved the taxpayer $5 million each year in interest payments, or $50 million over the life of the bond. That's $5 million that our Government wouldn't have to suck out of our pockets each year, at a time that most of us need every dollar we earn.

That this Government is putting our Island deeper and deeper into debt in order to support their careless spending sprees gives me great cause for concern. Yet again, they have failed to manage a major financial issue with the taxpayers' best interests at heart. It is pretty clear that we, the taxpayers, will be the real losers in the long run.

WATCHING THE PUBLIC PURSE

Warwick

Saddened by mail returns

July 22, 2010

Dear Sir,

I am so fed up with the Post Office. Some friends from Canada who lived here 22 years ago were visiting the island. They sent us an invitation from Canada to a party so that we could all get together while they were here. We never did receive it as they had not put the area code on it. When they went back home the invitation had been returned with a tick beside the area code.

This week we received a very belated birthday card from a friend in England. She had sent birthday cards to us for our birthdays in early June and they were returned as she didn't have the postal code on them. She used to live here and she wondered what was happening to this island. I should like to point out that we have lived in this house for 40 years. I can recall years ago, before this dictatorial government, we used to get mail with our name and only St. George's on the envelope and it was delivered promptly to us.

ST. GEORGIAN

Protester's viewpoint

July 26, 2010

Dear Sir,

Having attended the protest march/rally at the House of Assembly on Friday and followed most media coverage since, I feel compelled to write to you to provide some perspective.

This was the second rally at the House of Assembly I have attended in the last 13 months and on each occasion I was there for the same reason, namely to register my displeasure at my Government's approach (unnecessary haste) and handling (inappropriate secrecy) of important issues.

On each occasion accusations of racism were levelled at members of the public by Zane DeSilva because of the complexion of the majority of the protesters. Each accusation was ill-founded and ill-advised with the latest being the most twisted, preposterous and pathetic. Let me focus on the facts surrounding this latest occasion.

Over 400 protesters marched on the House of Assembly on Friday to express their dissatisfaction over the handling/treatment of our municipalities. No one was there to support the outdated voting franchise and everyone knows that. The protesters were also there to hand over the petition signed by 5,000 concerned citizens and the least they could expect is for someone from the PLP Government to be on hand to acknowledge the protesters and accept the petition. Unfortunately, this did not happen and I am convinced that this was the catalyst for what unfolded.

After what seemed a long wait in the hot sun, enter Zane DeSilva (with wife and son in tow) who proceeds to ignore the protesters (and the Mayors of both municipalities) and heads for his rather large Government car (GP13) which was parked in an area where protesters were standing. With a dull booing sound building the repetitive chant of "coward" started as the Minister got into his car. He did not ask anyone to please move aside. He started to back up his car and most people moved out of the way but a small handful (five to six people) did not. The Minister continued to back up, leaving those remaining in the way with no choice but to move.

The Minister did not drive aggressively but he was determined and all but a few (two to three) moved completely away. One person playfully leaned his back against the back of GP13 and mockingly made it look like he was being forced back (which in fact he was!). This person then gave the back end of the car what looked like a cheeky spank ("thump") as it drove off. I did hear a harmless "thump" but only one. I did not see anyone rock the car or behave menacingly but the chants of "coward" were now quite loud and would have been unsettling/embarrassing to those in the car. As the Minister headed off forwards (slowly), one man was a little in his path and it looked like he had to jump out of the way or risk being hit (and maybe he was lightly glanced!). This too was all very tame.

I also heard someone shout "idiot" which was out of line but other than that, I saw or heard nothing that was inappropriate. The reports of an "angry crowd surrounding the car" is technically correct but it was a relatively tame affair brought about by circumstances and not the result of anything premeditated or sinister. The Minister even waved as he drove off!

So, accusations by the Minister of "racism" and a potential "bloodbath" scenario are, in the circumstances, ridiculous in the extreme. The situation was a little charged for a few moments but what did the Minister expect? After all, this was a protest rally, not a tea party. Choosing to drive off at that time from that location in those circumstances was either naïve or Machiavellian. Had the Minister acknowledged the protesters and graciously accepted the petition as is normal in such circumstances, I have no doubt that the so-called "ugly" incident would never have happened.

I understand from your paper today that Mayor Gosling has called Minister DeSilva to apologise for any inappropriate behaviour on the part of any protesters. That was gracious and magnanimous of the Mayor which is way more than can be said of the honourable Minister.

JAY KEMPE

Devonshire