February 20, 2006

Dear Sir,

I have just read in today's paper about the BBC World channel being off the air. In it CableVision says that they did not know that anything about it, but were going to look into it. This is distressing since there are seven other channels, (these are 15,16,26,29,30,37, and 45), which are not working, and have not been working for two weeks. Does this mean that CableVision has no idea that these channels are not working? And if they don't know then what kind of cable company are they running here?

When you call up to complain you just get the run around and nothing happens. Today I also received my CableVision bill, and I have informed them that I have no intention to pay it until they fix these channels. Just think of the results we'd get if everyone did the same thing.

PUSHED OVER THE LIMIT

St. George's

February 17, 2006

Dear Sir,

The Bermudians for Referendum have done a good job in collecting as many signatures as they did in their petition and they should be satisfied with their accomplishment.

It is wrong for Mike Marsh as chairman of this committee to think this success authorises him to embark on personal vendettas against the Governor and the Premier and the former Leader of the Opposition Dr. Grant Gibbons.

It is silly for him to demand some undertaking that the petition will result in there being a referendum and then to threaten that if he doesn't get the undertaking he will march down Front Street and Whitehall and around Brussels.

It is even sillier for him to try to press his naive and ill-informed ideas for constitutional reform.

Unfortunately his actions undermine his credibility and the objectives which the signatories of the petition wish to achieve.

WILLIAM M. COX

Devonshire

February 20, 2006

Dear Sir,

I wish to respond to Mr. Dunleavy's 'Opinion' in the Wednesday, February 15, 2006 edition of . Mr. Dunleavy offered some profound remarks which should encourage the youth of Bermuda to take a more active role in our political community and he should be applauded for his effort in challenging the public to rise to the occasion. However, I oppose his obvious bias to the current government.

Mr. Dunleavy asserted: "Bermuda's current political debate is built around a framework that, quite simply, has no relevance to the majority of us who were either too young to remember, or born after, the era segregation ended."

These remarks are injudicious as most of "us" living today have either directly experienced segregation, or the remnants thereof. It is evident that we live in a society where many blacks and whites 'work together' but we often do not 'play together'. Bermuda is in a transition of healing and therefore, there are those that continue to advocate for equal rights to try to conquer the prejudices and hence the limitations established by our past.

Racism is not an ancient phenomenon that once plagued our society; but a current issue which our community is trying to address. Rather than cripple ourselves with fear and ignore the issue, we as a collective and unified people must embrace all questions concerning the imbalances within our community with unbridled courage so that we and all future generations may progress. The PLP acknowledges our past and pays homage by addressing the impact of segregation and highlighting what is necessary to create a level playing field for all Bermudians in the future. Until balance is achieved, how can we ignore the failings of the past and yet continue to live within its limits?

Mr. Dunleavy referred to the "majority of Cabinet and the 'radical' PLP base who put them there" as ceasing to mature at the time they came of age in the 1960's. He continued, "the PLP model is simple: stoke the fires of racial hatred; keep those fires burning and the public will turn a blind eye to neglect over housing, education, crime, healthcare and seniors". Such commentary is unjustified in light of all the legislative and social changes brought on by the government. The PLP has maintained the positive status quo while increasing opportunities for all Bermudians. They have encouraged further foreign investment on the island while providing opportunities for local businesses to emerge. Policies have been implemented to improve air travel and reduce congestion on the roads Licenses have been granted to break down monopolies and create further competition in telecommunications and proposals have been accepted to construct further houses. Simply put, the race card is not some crutch employed to cover the people's eyes.

By referring to the past, the PLP have addressed how economic disparities between the races came to be. In doing so, hopefully we can see our wrongs, encourage progress and move forward. Only by confronting our problems, addressing them with respect, and reaching out to one another with confidence and trust, will we see change. Those who do not like to hear about the past demonstrate their fear and their guilt.

We each have a responsibility not to be divisive; but our current leaders cling on to the past only to swing into the future. As Mr. Dunleavy himself commented, "never before has Bermuda enjoyed such abundance of well-educated, business savvy and highly successful young people. Never before have Bermudians of all ages been presented with so many opportunities on a global scale, complete with the skills to take advantage of them". Let us move together.

FYAH

SOUTHAMPTON WEST

February 18, 2006

Dear Sir,

Although I don't believe that very many Bermudians are even interested in Independence and I am sure that a Referendum would simply result in an overwhelming decision to maintain the status quo, I am continually amazed that the one variable that every right thinking person should be thinking about is barely recognised. That issue is the matter of citizenship.

In years gone by, when we thought about Independence and even held referendums, citizenship was not an issue - we didn't have any claim to much more than Bermuda Status. We had no right to British citizenship nor any right to citizenship of European Member States, and certainly no right to reside or work in those countries. In summary, citizenship was not a factor and many Bermudians just thought about Independence with their hearts, knowing they weren't giving up anything significant. That last point about 'significant losses' is not shared by most of us, I just mention it as a variable in the decision making process of those who think emotionally.

Any Referendum held in Bermuda on the subject of Independence will be the first time any British colony has considered the issue and at the same time stood to lose British and EU citizenship and all the rights attached. And for emphasis, those Bermudians who vote on the day of the Referendum will be making a monumental decision that will affect them and their children and their grandchildren and every single member of their family from that time on. Think of it ? if you are a Bermudian of voting age and you vote in favour of Independence, you are sentencing yourself and future generations to Bermudian citizenship which when this is all said and done means that you will be able to live and work in Bermuda ? that's it, no where else !

Now some people out there may not think this is a big thing. Certainly the Walton Browns of this world, and many others (and I do appreciate where they are coming from)' simply want to throw off the colonial yoke and distance themselves from any connection with Britain. There can be no more significant reason for this than the treatment of colonials - particularly Black colonials ? by the ruling British, over the years. I'm not disputing that but I am suggesting that reason and practicalities are worthy of consideration too.

The other thing that is important is that we are making a decision that will affect every future generation. Throwing off the yoke is one thing but the future of this world, much less the present, is globalisation not isolation. That's what we would be doing ? isolating ourselves and successive generations, from the world. That is unless you think that a 25-square mile piece of land in the middle of the ocean is really going to stir up the United Nations because we are a Member !

Just for emphasis and clarification, here is a list of European Member States where Bermudians can live and work freely, right now. And other countries are waiting to be admitted...!

Members (the capitals are mine for emphasis):

Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, DENMARK, Estonia, Finland, FRANCE, GERMANY, GREECE, Hungary, IRELAND, ITALY, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, THE NETHERLANDS, Poland, PORTUGAL, Slovakia, Slovenia, SPAIN, SWEDEN, the UNITED KINGDOM.

Believe me when I say that if this country became independent from Britain, we would not be offered any rights that we currently have. All we will have is the right to live and work in Bermuda.

SAMUEL L. CLEMENS

Southampton

Bermuda Well I Nevers!

February 18, 2006

Dear Sir,

As a regular reader of your "Well I Never!" column, I can't recall seeing anything featuring Bermuda. To demonstrate to an increasingly-prickly world that we can laugh at ourselves as well as at others, here are a couple of items you may want to share with other countries' newspapers:

BERMUDA (Royal Gazette) ? After months of ignoring warnings from the World Health Organisation, during which time the hundreds of feral chickens have multiplied into tens of thousands, the Ministry of Environment has at last decided to start culling them in two small areas. All feral chickens are asked to make their way to either St. David's or Spittal Pond as soon as possible. Meanwhile, any member of the public who lets one domestic chicken escape is liable to a fine of $2,800 or a six-month prison sentence. There is talk of bringing back hanging for anyone caught building a garden shed found to have exposed wiring.

BERMUDA (Royal Gazette) ? Athletes who participate in sports which receive Government funding may be called for random drug testing at any time. Despite being designed specifically for athletes, this programme does not test for performance-enhancing drugs. Testing positive, or refusal to take the test, may result in the athlete being banned from sport. A Government spokesperson said that if athletes want to receive money from the public purse they must prove themselves to be drug-free. When asked why Government ministers didn't have to undergo a similar test, with their salaries being paid from the public purse, he muttered something about invasion of privacy.

ANDREW R. DOBLE

Hamilton Parish