[naviga:h2]More than one leader[/naviga:h2]

January 30, 2010

Dear Sir,

Recently there has been discussion about the "next leader", why not leaders?

The two most significant events in recent black history are the desegregation of public places and the obtaining of the vote. Both of those events had collective, flexible multiple leadership, all unconcerned about the rewards.

Both were successful.

Ever since we decided that we had to have one leader we have spent all of our psychic energy and our political capital in concern about who would have the power and prestige of leadership (and the right to tell other MPs and the rest of us (?) what they can and cannot do) while we ignored the real problems in the black community, including the emerging black "underclass".

If we had more than one leader at least one of them might remember who has actually supported the PLP from the outset!

EVA N. HODGSON

Hamilton Parish

Where's the shelter?

January 30, 2010

Dear Sir,

It is absolutely appalling that the PLP Government can find $800,000 for overseas consultants to investigate the running of the Corporations of Hamilton and St. George's but they cannot find any money to help the many homeless people on our island.Two years ago, plans were drawn up for a "Homeless Shelter" on Parsons Road, Pembroke. In fact the Corporation of Hamilton entered into an agreement to exchange some property to assist with the much needed project. However, it is no surprise to find out that this project has been put "on hold" as Government has reported a "lack of funds".

It appears that this project has a low priority as it does not offer enough "glitz and glamour" to satisfy a government with an insatiable appetite for sensational, attention getting undertakings.

W.A. BLACK

Paget

A new way

January 22, 2010

Dear Sir,

Stormy days are part of living on this planet. Their main purpose is to wake us up, throw us out of our comfort zones, and force us to re-evaluate our priorities. In all likelihood we have all gone through our share of downpours and more or less survived them all. We have learnt from these experiences, and in most cases we have become stronger and more confident.

But more people than ever before are worried and afraid. Watching the news on television makes us believe that the future outlook of our world is bleak. In our environments, religious and ethnic violence, social unrest, bankrupt government, over population, natural disasters, many dark clouds are gathering.

In any case, the troubling state of our anxious world is a direct result of an old and outdated value system in which everything divided into us and them, in black and white, in right and wrong. This 'us' can be myself my family, my group, my nation. It is a form of tribalism where the major driving force is the belief in being superior to others by pointing fingers and blaming them with self-righteous cries for justice and revenge. This old Paradigm has not worked and needs to be replaced with a new way of thinking and acting if we want to survive individually and collectively.

In fact, the more we carry from the past the less we will be able to respond to the present, because the present is not a repetition of the past, it is always new, it is never old, it may sometimes appear like the old, but it is not old, there are basic differences.

Life never repeats itself. It is always fresh, always new, always growing, always moving into new adventures. Your old ready-made answers are not going to help you, in fact they will hinder you; they will not allow you to see the new situation. The situation will be new, and the answer will be old. That's why we look so stupid in life. But to remain stupid seems cheaper. To be intelligent needs effort. To be intelligent means you have to grow. And growth is painful. To be intelligent means you have to be alert and aware, you cannot fall asleep.

And to be intelligent has a few more dangers too. To be intelligent is very difficult because you have to live with the stupid crowds.

To live with blind people when you have eyes is a dangerous situation, they cannot tolerate you.

You are an offence.

SENSEI BURNELL WILLIAMS

City of Hamilton

Becoming more efficient

January 30, 2010

Dear Sir,

I believe that Bermuda has the largest number of government employees based upon population of any developed nation and the cost per head of population is the most expensive. Why?

One must question productivity from the manual workers we see on the sides of the road to the most senior of civil servants. They are all responsible for the cost of Government expenditure. Whenever I see the People's employees on the streets or in offices I see web pages displayed on computers that seem to have no bearing on the work supposed to be undertaken and personal cell phones pressed to ears.

I've seen a gang of six on the road with four of them leaning against walls with cell phones in use. All Government business? I doubt it. Before the advent of cell phones it was the accepted norm that Government wasn't as productive as private industry, but based upon the lower wage and salary provided it was considered acceptable. Wages and salaries now often exceed those paid in the private sector for the same work so inefficient practices and time wasting are no longer acceptable.

There are no doubt many committed Public Servants who provide good value for money but their ranks are full of those who do not perform and this has been acknowledged by the respective Union officers.

What is to be done to improve productivity? Have government employee numbers increased to meet genuine need and to provide new services or is it to do the same volume of work as was always done?

I have a suggestion or two for Ms Cox as she prepares her Budget. Ban personal use of the web and insist that personal cell phones are left in lockers and turned off at work. Get supervisors and managers to make sure that their subordinates are actually doing what they are paid for and are where they are supposed to be.

Productivity could improve 20% to 30%. As much of Bermuda is hurting, Government employees could then share the pain of the PLP's inept management of our finances. Put all Government employees on a four-day week and cut their pay by 10% to 15% with higher paid employees cut most. If the PLP don't squander these saved funds there is a possibility that the debt they have generated could be paid off before our grandchildren have died.

Our so called full time Ministers should also cut their pay by a third. They would probably still earn more per hour for actual work done than some successful business managers.

Is Ms. Cox able to promote the measures now necessary to reign in spending and start to cut the massive debt she has been responsible for allowing to grow?

I doubt it. Above all else the PLP want to retain power and hard measures that would be good for Bermuda may not be palatable to the PLP's core voters. Should Ms. Cox be unable to curb the unnecessary spending we have witnessed over the last decade and more so in the last three years I fear that the PLP will fulfil the worst fears of the UBP in the late 90s. The PLP Government will totally destroy our economy and our children's future financial security. We'll be lucky to stay at third world status if the PLP Government continues as they are going.

I have many desires that cost money to satisfy. When I have worked hard and saved enough I buy what I want. I do not believe that borrowing is a necessary part of Government business. The UBP started the fall from sound fiscal management by borrowing in the 80s to no doubt sway marginal supporters and to stay in power. To save Bermuda the PLP Government must cut back on unnecessary "services", stop offering services and support at below cost to tiny fractions of the population and cut overall costs to below income to permit the start of the repayment of the potentially crippling debt we all now face.

Politicians of all parties and party politics are in a large part responsible for the financial mess we are in. Are the PLP strong enough to get us out of it for all of Bermuda's People?

TAXPAYER

Pembroke

Borrowing not needed

February 6, 2010

Dear Sir,

What our Minister of Finance seems to fail to understand is that it is not necessary to borrow money to run a country. It may be a normal occurrence, but it is by no means a necessity.

Ms. Cox lists all the stuff that Government spent our money on as justification for taking us into a perilous debt ridden state. I bet there are many like me who know of tens of millions of dollars of expenditure that didn't need to be spent. There are probably hundreds of millions of dollars of discretionary spending over the last ten years where some thought and planning could have eliminated or delayed expenditure.

Some programmes are essential but with good management it should be possible to administer those Government services within income limits.

This PLP Government has an unhealthy desire to spend our money to buy or build new even where it has been proven to be less costly to maintain what they inherited. They also promote unbelievably expensive social programmes that we just cannot afford, just to win the votes to stay in power. It will be those people that the PLP purported to be helping who will be the first to feel the effects of the damage the PLP Government have done to our finances.

We as families have to live within our means and my family saves to buy major items so we only have to worry about our mortgage payment. We don't use our credit cards unless we know we can pay off the debt every month. This way we don't incur oppressive interest charges and we appreciate much more what we worked for.

If we can live within our means, why didn't the PLP Government and why can they not start to do so now? Governing in good times is easy. Now let's see if the PLP Government has the testicular fortitude to take the hard decisions so that we are not dragged deeper and deeper into an unrepayable debt.

Save, pay off your debt and then buy within your income.

THE BORROWERS

Pembroke

Wishing BDA success

February 2, 2010

Dear Sir,

The Bermuda Democratic Alliance is a well named coalition which has vowed to take race out of politics. This coalition party rejects the use of race or class as a means to political success. The BDA is destined to form a government that stands for equality of opportunity, social and economic justice, and transparency in its work for the benefit of all Bermuda's people.

Let us wish it success.

OWEN H. DARRELL

Pembroke

All is not rosy

February 7, 2010

Dear Sir,

I have listened intently to many concerned individuals who have shared their opinions on talk radio; however, I've taken note that too often the Progressive Labour Party diehards are quick to defend whenever they hear comments that are not pleasing to their ears.

Of course that's their prerogative, however, if those individuals have benefited in one way or another under a PLP administration, they should accept that they are not in a position to empathise with those who share different opinions and experiences. They certainly don't expect the entire population of Bermuda to share the elation they feel regarding the performance of the PLP Government.

There are some who may have a negative impression, especially those who have experienced injustices, spent thousands of dollars on legal fees, and know more than the average person about the inner workings and mindset of certain lawyers, trade unionists and senior Government officials.

If I was to share some of these experiences which have occurred since November 1998, the two minutes allocated on a talk show simply would not suffice. I can, therefore, empathise with the many individuals who have been negatively impacted and have shared their concerns about the failures of this Government.

Why do we continue to hear allegations of corruption? Of course this will sound alarm bells and draw our attention to Auditor General Heather Jacobs-Matthews' report and Shadow Finance Minister Bob Richards' concerns about Bermuda's mounting national debt. There is nothing necessarily wrong with justifiable debt, however, when the question of 'How is the money being spent?' is evaded, one can't help but assume the worst.

We, the concerned parents and even grandparents, have to speak up for our children and grandchildren who are, perhaps, too young at this time to understand the huge financial burden which is being placed upon them. Is this not a concern of the Finance Minister?

In reference to the recent 'cog in the wheel' comment made by the representative of my constituency, Minister Cox should now realise that it takes more than an eloquent speech to run the Ministry of Finance. No disrespect to Minister Cox but, in my view, she was asked to do the impossible when she became Finance Minister because that position should, no doubt, be occupied by someone with a strong financial background. If the appointment was made for any other reason, then it has proven to be a grave mistake.

If Minister Cox has any intention of taking on an even greater responsibility, i.e. becoming the Premier of Bermuda, then she must find the 'testicular fortitude' that she previously referred to, and take a stand when necessary, even if it means having to resign if she strongly disagrees with the majority of the group. In other words, she doesn't have to be a 'cog in the wheel', for a response such as that simply reminds me of the reaction of some teenagers when faced with peer pressure.

Minister Cox recently stated that '…the pen is mightier than the sword but in the hands of an irresponsible and biased writer, it can become a misguided, misdirected and even dangerous weapon'. She should heed that statement for she's the one who appears to be irresponsibly and dangerously signing off Bermuda's future with mounting debt obligations, and enslaving Bermudians to long term debt.

Perhaps Minister Cox may find the following proverbs to be of interest: 'Speaking without thinking is shooting without aim' and 'Speak little but speak the truth'. In addition to this, I kindly suggest that Minister Cox and her fellow Cabinet Ministers reflect upon a quote of American author Napoleon Hill, "Think twice before you speak, because your words and influence will plant the seed of either success or failure in the mind of another."

Some comments previously uttered by certain Ministers have been less than impressive. I often wonder exactly what message they are attempting to send to our youth.

Is it fair to us parents that certain Ministers have been allowed to dodge the responsibility of monitoring expenditures within his/her Ministry without penalty, yet are proposing legislation to penalise parents whose children go astray? Perhaps they should focus on leading the way by implementing a Ministerial Responsibility Act rather than a Parental Responsibility Act.

J. CAINES

Devonshire