Thank you, Bermuda

December 16,2004

Dear Sir,

I would like to thank, through your letter page, all the people involved in reuniting me with my "carry on" bag which I foolishly left on the grass verge outside the airport on Tuesday evening, when my grandson came to pick me up from the B.A. flight.

When we discovered what had happened he drove me back, (thank you Alastair for doing it so cheerfully) but to no avail.

The following day when we returned to the airport everyone was so helpful, especially the Customs officer who took me to the B.A. desk, which unfortunately was closed, and then to every storeroom she could think of to see if it was there.

Thank you too to the lady at the B.A. office on Front Street who traced me through the passenger manifest, realised I had came in with my daughter and phoned her to tell me they had the bag.

My thanks to the lady at Robertson's Pharmacy who gave me an emergency supply of my medication which I was worried about.

Finally I would like to thank the honest person who returned the bag to the airport on Tuesday evening.

My daughter was right when she said, "this is Bermuda. You'll get it back".

A Happy Christmas to you all.

Showing feet of clay

December 10, 2004

Dear Sir,

I was shocked, but not surprised at the recent example of our Government treating the Bermuda taxpayer like a personal, bottomless money-pocket! It is certainly true that too much power corrupts, and sadly, I have seen the few people I have hoped would be immune to the temptation of taking advantage of this power, show themselves to have feet of clay.

On another subject, everyone bemoans the horrendous traffic on our roads; a great deal of it due to the rescinding of the law which allowed only the owner to drive his or her vehicle. I can foresee our Transport Minister (in order to curry favour) allowing every age-eligible member of a family to own a car.

I am a senior citizen who regrets the corruption in our midst, but I have only one vote and there are so many mindless people who do not realise that the privilege of a vote is more than just supporting someone who may be able to get his or her cousin a cushy job!

One thing I can say for our Government, ? they are all better-dressed than they once were and even seem to be putting on weight (physically, not mentally)!

The Blunkett example

December 15, 2004

Dear Sir,

I have once again been roundly chastised by 'my readers' because of the lack of letters recently. I have to confess to the fact that I could write three letters a day on the goings on 'up on the hill', but alas I am not a full-time politician.

One recent item caught my attention. According to the public statement of one PLP Minister telephone calls were made to certain government departments to enquire about the availability of certain accommodation. Within days an allocation was made to a direct relative, while others have been on the list for some time. Whether intentional or not telephone calls from a Minister will evoke urgency on the part of the person called, and not unreasonably this will be interpreted as abuse of position.

A headline of the BBC (UK) today reads as follows:

"David Blunkett has quit as home secretary following allegations he abused his position." He appears to have fast tracked a visa application for a foreign nanny by enquiring telephone calls and e:mail.

Dare we ask why the PLP does not require the same honourable course of action when there is abuse of position? Or, is it a simple case of follow my leader?

Lastly, I do wish all 'my readers' and well wishers a very Happy Xmas and a Prosperous New Year, and thank them all for their support and encouragement.

Correcting pension woes

Dear Sir,

The challenges now facing the Public Service Superannuation Fund (PSSF) are serious indeed and Bermuda can ill afford to let this problem escalate further, for it appears to be already out of control when your paper reported this week the fund was bailed out with taxpayer's funds to the tune of $22 million over the 2001-03 periods.

I applaud your paper for publicising this problem and carrying out your watchdog role, and by way of this letter I hope to encourage further debate in the hope that radical changes are made soon to alleviate the financial pain that will surely come to taxpayers in the future should nothing be done.

The present challenges of the civil service pension fund is a classic example, in my opinion, where politicians haven't taken the bold step in the past needed to correct what is a failing pension programme that will continue to need tax dollars in the future to bail it out of its troubles. What is interesting about this topic is that it is not unique to Bermuda. Governments around the world are in the same boat and most are tackling the problem head on by changing the pension program from one of "defined benefits" to one of "defined contributions".

As I understand it, the present pension structure in the PSSF as well as its smaller cousin the Members of the House Pension Plan is one of "defined benefit". In simple terms this means that when a pension member officially retires, their pension payout is a percentage of their final salary. You will appreciate that should the Fund not throw off sufficient income or witness growth in its assets, a deficit will arise, and therefore Government ? i.e. the taxpayer ? will need to foot the bill.

Bermuda needs to amend this "defined benefit" structure as soon as possible and adopt the "defined contribution" option. In this structure, which is the most popular of pension structures used today and the one adopted for the Bermuda National Pension Plan, the worker makes contributions to their pension plan and can elect an investment strategy as to how they want to invest their pension assets. Upon retirement, the pension payout will be what their pension plan can afford and there is no need for a Government (read taxpayer) bailout. The importance of these structures is that the workers get to review their pension assets over time and can alter their savings habits to accommodate the type of retirement they wish to have.

Bermuda's PSSF is in dire straits and the increase in the size of Government employees by almost 1,000 staff since the Government took office in 1998 is only going to exacerbate the problem in the future for the taxpayer. Also, I believe the House Members Pension Plan is in the same boat as the PSSF, although it is a much smaller plan. Bermuda needs to make these radical changes now and perhaps what is needed is a bi-partisan committee of Parliament to review the plan.

Should we then witness enough momentum that presents a bill for passage in Parliament, I would encourage the voters to look closely at how the votes are cast for or against these changes. Don't hold your breath though that such action will ever be taken up by the present administration, although I'd love to be proved wrong on this point.

As the saying goes: "God bless our children and grandchildren, for they shall inherit the national debt."

Church is wrong

December 15, 2004

Dear Sir,

The Anglican bishop cannot be blamed for being the mouthpiece of his church. It is the Anglican Church itself that is wrong, along with a number of other churches, notably the Roman Church. The Anglican Church is wrong in discriminating against gay clergy for several obvious reasons, the first of which is that it seems quite unacceptable and totally perverse that any church should stand in the way of anyone who wishes to serve God.

There is any number of other reasons amongst which are:1, If active sexuality is unacceptable for a monogamous gay priest it must be equally unacceptable for a monogamous straight priest. Celibacy, as purportedly practised in the Roman Church, should then be the norm for all priests. For a priest to demand celibacy in others while not being so himself is the depth of hypocrisy.

2. The inescapable implication made by the present equivocal stance of the Anglican Church (and other churches) is that to be born gay is somehow to be born more sinful than anyone else. To be gay is not to be like everyone else with the exception of having a perverse sexual "preference". Being gay is a state of being that is an integral part of an entire life, not just something that kicks in along with the libido. To believe otherwise (I say believe because it is now not possible to think otherwise) is to put the church in the same untenable position in which the Roman Church found itself for several hundred years vis-?-vis Galileo.

3. For the Anglican Church or any other church to discriminate officially or doctrinally against persons who are gay is automatically to validate and empower such prejudice in the world at large. To do so is, in its effect, to endorse and promote the sickening violence to which gay men and women are still regularly subjected. For any church to maintain such prejudice in the full awareness of its brutal consequences is profoundly unchristian.

4. Nowhere does the Bible condemn homosexuality. The early Hebrews who wrote the Old Testament had no knowledge of homosexuality, a point quite clearly demonstrated by the terminology used in the widely quoted Levitical "prohibition".

5. The Notion that the so-called "sin of Sodom" consisted in an unusually widespread occurrence of homosexuality in that ill-fated city is clearly disproved in Ezekiel and in the words of our Lord Jesus Christ himself. Paul had natural problems with idolatry and thus with the promiscuous sexuality that frequently accompanied it. He also wrongly assumed that a heterosexual nature was common to all. This was not the only occasion when Paul felt quite comfortable correcting what he thought of as God?s mistakes.

6. None but the most shallow reading of the story of Christ?s healing of the Centurion's slave can leave anyone in any doubt that the slave (or, more accurately translated, "young man") was the Centurion's male lover. If Christ had no problem with the circumstances surely his church shouldn?teither.

7. Anyone who stands pat on a doctrinal prejudice against gays based on scripture must inescapably also support the institution of slavery for the same reason.

It was interesting that the Bishop should come out with his mealy-mouthed prejudices the day after an excellent opinion piece appeared in your paper by William Raspberry in which he spoke in favour of civil marriage unassailed by the prejudices of the church. More interesting still that all of this should follow on the heels of Human Rights Day last week. The deeply unchristian stance of many churches is to oppose, often unconstitutionally, the human rights of gay people everywhere, whether or not they are adherents of a particular church or of none.

SEARCHING FOR CHRISTIANITY

Warwick

Scrooge alive and well

December 16, 2004

Dear Sir,

"Scooge" is very much alive in Bermuda this Xmas. Seniors were given notice that their rent will go up double and more. Letters from the Rent Control "Mr. Foley" approves the increase. It seems that the rent control BHC and BHT are all in the same bed together. Surely all of them know how hard the seniors have it these days to make the money go around and on top of that the letter says if you want it reviewed, you must pay $28... I just cannot believe Mr. Foley would be so cruel and heartless to seniors. "How can you sleep at night?". Do you not realise how many old people on "Fixed incomes" are worrying themselves sick. They have no magic wand. We understand 'maintenance' is higher these days and we could manage a few dollars more ? $50 or $100 if we go very careful and do without little unnecessary things, but not to make money for more housing from seniors, that's the BHC problem not ours.

To have to ask for social assistance, how "humiliating". We old people have worked all our lives to make this island what it is today. Show us some compassion and leave us alone to die in dignity. Anyone in their right mind can see this is a 'wrong' thing to do to seniors, but we all know there is a 'God' above in case a lot of people seem to have forgotten these days of "Greed".

A SENIOR FOR SENIORS.

Devonshire

Clearing up confusion

December 14, 2004

Dear Sir,

Before I had even removed the shrink-wrap from my copy of Ms. Rosemary Jones' book "Bermuda FIVE CENTURIES", I was asked by someone who had read it if I could verify the accuracy of the information in "The Evangelists" on page 117, in particular the last two sentences. As there may be others who are similarly confused, I should appreciate space in your column to clarify the references to "the Church of Gods and "the Evangelical Church of Bermuda.

The original name of the church established in 1890, following the baptism of eleven coverts in Devonshire Bay, was "a Igreja de Deus em Bermuda" (The Church of God in Bermuda). There was no affiliation with the denomination knows as "The Church of God". Indeed, The Evangelical Church of Bermuda is, and always has been, independent of any denominational affiliation.

For those who would like to learn more on the subject, the two books I authored/edited should still be in the Bermuda National Library: A Short History of The Evangelical Church of Bermuda published in 1968 and The Evangelical Church of Bermuda The First Century 1890 - 1990 published in 1997 by The Bermudian Publishing Company Ltd. There may also be limited copies available from the Church.

LINDA DESILVA

Why not try new mixes?

December 15, 2004

Dear Sir,

I've noticed DJ Phantom on Hott 107.5 always seems to use the same mixes. Why not play mixes never heard on the radio before? He could probably use beats from songs like Christina Milian's 'Dip It Low', Jagged Edge's 'Hard' and 'Visions' or probably reggae tunes like Wayne Wonder's 'Definitely' and 'Friend Like Me'. Basically something new for a change.

Speaking of change when are you guys going to play Ja Rule's 'New York,New York'? This beat is hot! Also,that song 'Johnny Barnes' is so weak,the only thing i like is probably the beat. Another stinkie is 'Welcome To The Island'. Sorry but,even though Tayo Dill might like this song it's now weak (last week). Local artists should try new songs and Chicago's idol should come up with new songs.

Hopefully next year,Tayo will have a new intro dub to his 2 p.m. show (no offence but the one you have now will eventually die).

TRY NEW MIXES

Pembroke

Check GP cars

December 15, 2004

Dear Sir,

Before the Minister of Transport looks into the private car usage or possible abuse of their allocation, he should check the GP car pool first to confirm persons driving these cars actually require them. This might determine that less of them need to be on the road. Except for a few exceptions, e.g. nurses, why cannot Members of Parliament, Civil Servants and others use their personal cars the same as everyone else in the regular workplace?

I find it disturbing to see GP1 at the A1 Market Place in Smith's on Saturday morning, December 11, 2004. Are my tax dollars now paying for the "Premier" to go grocery shopping?

Also, why at the "AT" cars still permitted? Years ago the airline managers delivered crew to their hotels, etc. Do they really need these cars now?