I see by the article on page 8 of your June 8 edition Fisheries is still trying to beat up on some of our few remaining honest fishermen. As punishment for refraining from using illegal fish pots these few honest fishermen are once again threatened with the seizure of their boats if they take their family and friends to honour the Tall Ships parade.

I guess the fish Nazis are at it again and they've dragged Customs into it too! I remember many years ago when, as a teenager, my father took many friends and relatives out to view the start of a Tall Ships Race on his fishing boat The Bay Queen . No threats from Agriculture & Fisheries. But I guess that department has now changed into the Department of Aggravation and Miseries. I guess for a fisheries department to not have a clue as to which fishermen were fishing illegal fishpots they'd have to do something once in a while, but threatening to confiscate fishing boats is a bit draconian.

I'd like to suggest to all Bermudian fishermen to get together on Tall Ships Parade Day and fish! Maybe you'll get lucky and land a Tall Ship.

Just imagine fifty boats anchored and fishing all over and around `three sisters'.

SPANISH POINT VOTER `In the public interest' June 19, 2000 Dear Sir, Throughout all time government administrations are remembered by their catch phrases, indeed buzz words. You know "read my lips'', "glass ceiling'', "sustainable development'' etc. Most recently the phrase in the public interest, which is borrowed from the related legislation, appears to be the current blanket for which our Government can avoid their cornerstones of Accountability, Transparency and Fairness.

It would almost seem redundant to have such wording in legislation. I mean to have to remind the current Minister(s) to make decisions in the public interest seems so obvious. However when one examines the litany of knee-jerked reasons given for the oversized vehicle decision maybe the wording is not redundant rather just its meaning is forgotten. Remember when it all began last December the answer was...

The Minister of W&E was unaware of any car on order and 15 days later he was driving it (boy that is good service!) then: It was that Ministers deserved these cars, then it was a good deal because it was $40,000-plus and really only $20,000-plus because it was a book entry to Customs. Then it was a good deal because we got a brake and lube job for GP1 and besides in 10 years we could sell it to some fool offshore and recoup our money.

Next to weigh in was the Minister of Transport and he offered the reason "that the Premier had made the decision and he was only carrying out orders''. Now where was that excuse used in recent times? Not being satisfied with that one the same Minister offered the reason that it was the UBP who approved these cars, by way of previously approved legislation, and he would be making a ministerial statement to prove it. Wait for it, yes it was the 1951 Motor Car Act that was referenced. This is strange as my records indicate that the United Bermuda Party was formed in 1968! Still not satisfied the Minister offers the reason that it is embarrassing to put our dignitaries in small cars and that these vehicles will form a motor pool of executive vehicles to be available for them whilst visiting. Has the government fallen out with the taxi industry? Some of the finest drivers and clearly some of the best-kept taxis in the world are here in Bermuda, and they are not small. I thought that's why many of the drivers have been called Bermuda's Ambassadors.

Oh well, the votes are in and they only have to be nice to the taxi industry just before every election. Tell me, given that, in the public interest, our visiting dignitaries will not be able to drive whilst visiting, who will drive them? The Ministers, with their busy schedule? Official government chauffeurs? Officers from the Regiment? Now just when it seemed to die down into the breach comes the Minister of W&E again who lets everyone know that he is the Minister in charge of these and the other 80-odd GP vehicles. Obviously forgetting the first reasons offered, after all it was six months ago and the public was supposed to forget, the Minister offers.... That the vehicles will be in the possession of and driven by certain Ministers. Further, our Ministers are on 24-hour call and the people should be comfortable seeing these vehicles parked at any and all private social gatherings. Now about that GP1 brake and lube job, it wasn't as good a deal as thought because the Premier is about to get a new and even bigger car than the Ministers. Also, we should be thankful because a 406 is cheaper than a 306. Well, in the public interest, and from a balance of payments point of view should not everyone in Bermuda be able to purchase better, cheaper? And finally the truth as offered by the Minister of Telecommunications and I quote "We wanted to support a black business, if you really want to know.

Shifting the economic wealth is part of our agenda.'' So, in the public interest it was not about a good deal or bidding, or a GP1 brake and lube job, or Ministers right, or selling them offshore in ten years, or embarrassing our visiting dignitaries, or the UBP. It was about the introduction of the failed policies of Affirmative Action ahead of CURE and manipulating the rules to fit the decision. How come the two other Ministers involved could not be so forthright? In the public interest a redundant phrase indeed.

DAVID J. SULLIVAN Sandys Parish Birds are a problem too June 5, 2000 Dear Sir, With reference to the letter from Just Wondering, glad to know that you have brought the problems of barking dogs to the attention of Arthur Hodgson.

I would also like to bring to Mr. Hodgson's attention the problem that is ruining the peace of the Island by neighbours who keep these exotic birds from South America which continually keep "scraking'' non-stop. They can be more of a noise problem than dogs, and they attract rats and other pests.

Looking forward to hearing something on the bird problem.

BIRD CAGE Paget `Confused' about issues June 12, 2000 Dear Sir, Please forgive me if my views appear naive but I am confused. I would like to address two issues.

The first is the government's choice to buy five new larger cars. These cars are being purchased so that when we entertain foreign dignitaries and they can be transported in the manner to which they are accustomed. So -- who will drive these cars? Or will they come with drivers? If not, who will be picking these "special people'' up at the airport, from the golf course, taking them to restaurants? Will our busy Ministers be taking time out of their busy days to do this? Who is next in line for these "larger, more luxurious cars'' -- the big exempt companies? Surely they must entertain some very wealthy and important people? Alternatively, why doesn't the Government subcontract five local Bermudian taxis? They could pay five taxi drivers a retainer to be on call when and as necessary -- no maintenance -- no drivers necessary -- no wasted time out of our busy Ministers' days -- so that maybe they could spend more time dealing with the many other issues this Island has.

This solution would be putting money into the Bermudian economy and help support the taxi industry. If I were a foreign dignitary I think it would be nice to be met by a friendly Bermudian taxi driver, who will give me a little tour and enlighten me with Island trivia -- there would be no guilt because I was keeping a Minister away from, I'm sure, his busy schedule -- but of course -- maybe there are drivers with these cars.

My second issue is the need to purchase a house for entertaining for the Minister of Tourism. Is not the job of the Ministry of Tourism "to promote tourism in Bermuda''? If so shouldn't visitors be staying at our local hotels, guest houses etc. and dining in our local restaurants? Maybe I'm wrong -- maybe we do need to spend $5 million on a house for "entertaining''. I am well aware that this money was not supposed to come directly from Government coffers -- but from our exempted companies etc. -- I'm sure they would much rather donate to more worthy causes and there are many of them. Also where would the money then come for up-keep, maids, butler, cook etc.? Looks like "we the people'' will be doling out again.

In closing, is this government really looking out for the people or is it just making sure that its Ministers' pockets are well-lined? CONFUSED Pembroke King's good advice June 21, 2000 Dear Sir, I would like to elevate magistrate King to "King of Bermuda''. His recent advice to "stop blaming others... and take responsibility for our own actions'' will do a lot to solve not only Bermuda's problems, but most of the problems in this world today. We have to start looking at behaviour as either being right or wrong without consideration for one's colour or background. We have to apply only one set of rules to govern an act regardless of our relationship to the one who commits the act. We are all guilty of prejudiced thinking in one way or another, with some it's colour, with others it's family. It would be a wonderful thing if all residents of Bermuda could look at themselves and each other as members of one Bermuda family, either black or white, young or old, local or expat. Our problems would be fewer and simpler to resolve and our opportunities would be boundless. I believe that Bermuda is closer to being able to achieve this than most other countries, but it would take a total effort, especially from our political leaders.

JOE LINDO Thanks to the Bank June 15, 2000 Dear Sir, It is so gratifying to read nice letters to the editor such as Alvin R.

Gouldbourn of the Fathers Resource Centre on Wednesday last, which praised Art Festival by the Sea. A lot of creative effort (by all of the artists) and hard work combined to make the day a success. However, none of this would have been possible without the Bank of N.T. Butterfield who generously sponsored the event as well as funding the Visual Arts Scholarship.

I would like to express my heart-felt gratitude to Calum Johnson, Carla Lacey Minors and Tracy Outerbridge in particular for making this annual event possible! ELISE OUTERBRIDGE Assistant Director The Masterworks Foundation