Just serving time

March 28, 2005

Dear Sir,

I am writing to ask why we still view (male only) conscription as an acceptable practice.

I see nothing wrong with Bermuda keeping its Regiment, but forced involvement through conscription is unethical and should be abolished.

My entire education has repeatedly taught the importance of freedom and equality, neither of which are represented by the current system of conscription. The very nature of the Regiment with the legal power to force anyone selected to attend, even if it is against their will, directly interferes with the individual?s rights by removing the choice of whether to attend or not.

The fact that large fines and even jail sentences may be given to those who fail to attend is a denial of an individual?s rights.

At a time when equal rights are taken for granted by so many, why does this system still only hold conscription necessary for males? Surely there is no logical, political argument for this. If conscription were to continue into the future, then it should equally be so for females as well. Surely it would be better solely as a volunteer force for both sexes.

As well as the moral objections to the system, there are clearly logical weaknesses in this kind of recruitment.

It is inevitable that some reverse psychology will apply to this situation, in that those forced to attend will immediately wish not to and therefore have a negative attitude for much, if not all, of their period within the Regiment. Successive intakes of recruits who serve only their minimum time with the Regiment are sent through basic training on a repeated cycle with no real long-term benefit for the Regiment. If there were a true choice as to whether to serve or not, future recruits could be expected to stay longer and the investment in their training would be returned through their prolonged and more enthusiastic service. Recruits who had a genuine interest could also be expected to have much better attitudes and be a more efficient investment of the Regiment?s resources, when compared to those who had been forced to attend.

The Regiment often claims that only a small amount of time is spent each year engaged in Regiment-related activities. While this may be true for some, for those working all week in regular jobs (presumably the majority), the time required to be spent with the Regiment actually represents a large proportion of their free time.

I have often heard people argue that the Regiment is ?good for some of those guys? who may require the discipline in their lives. Although this may be true in some cases, the Regiment does not call up everyone, so what of those who are not called up? Besides, is it right to expect the Regiment in three years to correct social problems that have emerged through years of upbringing?

A final point, from personal experience from the Regiment, on the evening at Warwick Camp, I have never before seen so many unhappy Bermudians in one place at one time. Not a single person I met there wanted to be there and several of the recruits who were directing us mumbled phrases such as ?I?m just serving my time? hardly the words of a free man.

Why not have a Regiment that all Bermudians can support, based upon voluntary recruitment of both sexes, rather than male only conscription.

CONSCRIPT

Pembroke

Let?s talk about race

March 31, 2005

Dear Sir,

Congratulations to Barbara Johnston who declared last night at the BIC meeting in Somerset; ?All you have to do in Bermuda is to be white and you?re there.?

Ms Johnston illustrated with great honesty, unlike our Government leaders, that the Independence debate is about race and race alone. Any reasoned analysis about the risks/rewards of Bermuda becoming Independent has and will continue to illustrate that there is no rational reason for Independence. The factor that tilts opinion towards Independence is emotive, based largely on the hangover of racism.

Many believe Independence will cure this hangover. This same group of people probably believed that the PLP?s victory in the General Election of 1998 would cure this hangover. I am sure they are disappointed and are looking for another cure. They will also find Independence to be a hollow elixir which will have a much higher emotional, economic and political cost.

Therefore, rather than have a discussion about Independence, we would be better served as a community to address the issue of racism. The social fabric of Bermuda is not healthy enough to engage in a reasoned debate about an issue as important as Independence. What we will find is that our lives will become more fulfilling once we take personal responsibility for our feelings, actions and futures. We have had almost seven years of first-hand experience showing that having a ?black? Government does not necessary make our little world more fulfilling ? it is up to each and every one of us to take personal responsibility and stop blaming others for our lack of fulfilment.

Ms Johnson, thank you for your honesty and eloquence ? you summarised the entire pro-Independence movement in fourteen words.

R. HAMILL

Hamilton Parish

Hypocritical Government

March 16, 2005

Dear Sir,

Christian Dunleavy?s Opinion in today?s Royal Gazette was right on the money, Mr. Editor.

This Government is the most hypocritical Government ever. Many Bermudians can read between the lines though. I just worry about those Bermudians who do to fully understand that this Government is trying to pull to wool over their eyes. It is a crying shame that the very people that are put into a place of high regard cannot be truthful. What does it take to be honest from the beginning?

They should have learned from the Berkeley disaster that the truth will come to in the wash eventually. You can fool some of the people some of the time, etc. Now we understand that the Bermuda Homes for People was in trouble since January. Well, excuse me, but it?s March. We are also told that the Bank of Bermuda is a locally owned bank. Well that?s not true either. What?s going to happen next? Can we assume that the newly appointed Independence Commission will be truthful and honest? I don?t know because we can?t trust anything the Government has anything to do with. It is very disheartening to say the least.

Another question I have, Mr. Editor, is what exactly are the Government cars supposed to be used for? Is it Government business only? Are they supposed to pick up their groceries, pick up the dry-cleaning, and pick up their girlfriends with Government vehicles? Who is paying for the gas that they consume while doing their daily chores throughout the island? Government Ministers should be issued bikes instead of cars, maybe that will cut down on expenses. But the sky has no fallen yet, Mr. Editor.

We really need to think very clearly before the next election and decide whether we want a Government in power whose only care in the world seems to be what they can take home at the end of the day, or if we prefer a Government who will work to build a Bermuda for all Bermudians, black and white, who truly care about our welfare and that are as honest as the day is long.

M. DUBOIS

Pembroke

DeVent a ?Yes Minister?

March 16, 2005

Dear Sir,

Thank you very much for accepting my letters, because the politicians hear, but they don?t really listen.

I read the Letters to the Editor every day, because I have found this is where the backbone of society express their feelings. I listened to the Budget debate on March 4, 2005. It was a very constructive session up until the Premier asked the Speaker to adjourn the House. Mrs. Louise Jackson, Opposition Spokeswoman for the seniors was in my opinion shown disrespect by all the Ministers that spoke on behalf of Government. I was so angry I felt like going through the radio to physically attack Mr. Derrick Burgess and Renee Webb for the verbal abuse they gave to Mrs. Louise Jackson?s presentation. Every time she gets up to speak on behalf of the seniors, the Government is so negative towards her.

Mr. Editor, I once visited a friend at Lefroy House. While there I noticed a senior resident sitting on a couch reading the newspaper which was upside down. I said: ?Sir, your newspaper is upside down.? I got no response. My friend then asked me if I knew who the gentleman was. My answer was no. He said to me, that is the first black Premier of Bermuda. Mrs. Jackson was right by saying that the Government Ministers may need a seniors residence in their later years of life, so I am asking that the Ministers be more compassionate towards the plight of Bermuda seniors, because only God knows the future.

Minister Randy Horton did an excellent report on his Ministry by doing a breakdown on where the funds are being spent, again thanks for showing your teaching skills.

Minister Ashfield Devent?s report was all repetition. I became bored after his entire reading in which he said nothing interesting. I tuned in to hear what 2005-2006 Budget would be for his Ministry. All I heard was what was done with the 2004/2005 budget and very little discussion on the 2005-2006 budget. After hearing him read for five and a half hours, I wonder if he is a ?Yes? minister. He is not a spontaneous speaker. I listened to the House on March 11, Maxwell Burgess brought up an interesting point concerning the Bermuda Housing complex at Harbourside in St. David?s.

I remember the Opposition bring up questions concerning the Bermuda Housing Corporation and the Berkeley Institute?s financial situation and the Government denied the rumours, months later they were proven to be true. Now the rumours about the Harbourside Village have started.

I have been made to understand that one of the financial backers withdrew and the Minister of Works & Engineering has turned over full responsibility to the complex to be managed by the Bermuda Land Development Company. I personally don?t have faith in them, because they have been in charge of the Baselands for seven years and I haven?t seen much progress there.

I was tuned in to ZBM news March 14. The first story read was about Harbourside. If I was slightly confused before starting this letter surely, after hearing the news, I am totally confused now.

Mr. Editor, I am calling for the Speaker of the House to spend more time in his seat of which he was elected and only use the deputy speaker to give him a break, half of the time the Minister on the floor is so mixed up or confused as to who to address, its causing a ball of confusion. I want to say something about the Minister of Health and Social Services, but not at this time, just a congratulation on motherhood and giving Bermuda another citizen.

To the Ministers, backbencher and opposition of the house please show respect towards each other, after all you are being broadcast to the public. You can agree to disagree and to Mr. Speaker you are in charge of the house, so control your household.

WILLARD SINCLAIR FOX

St. David?s

Abuse of words

March 27, 2005

Dear Sir,

Allow me to remark on the stupidity of the letter appearing in Saturday?s Royal Gazette signed ?Animal Rights Advocate?, which in fact was about the author?s illogical promotion of Independence by high-jacking the anti-dolphin ?oasis? cause as some bizarre metaphor.

Clearly the author is not in the least interested in the rights of man or animal but only an advocate of the notion held by powerful cabinet politicians: those fighting against permission being granted for the ?oasis? are part of the ?old? Bermuda. Clearly he thinks he is being very clever when in fact he is not in the least.

Like many Independence advocates, he believes that the political connotation ?Independence? actually has something to do with the real meaning of the word in the English language. It does not. It will mean chaining Bermudians to the Rock.

In the same dishonest way, the promoters of placing captive dolphins on display have selected the word ?oasis? to suggest some sort of sanctuary for dolphins, mammals which have the habit of ranging hundreds of miles with great speed as part of their natural daily routine. It does not, and here the word ?oasis? just like ?Independence? actually translates as ?prison?.

ANIMAL DOCTOR

Pembroke

The democratic way

March 27, 2005

Dear Sir,

The only democratic way to decide our independence is via referendum.

Deciding via General Election could mean that a minority opinion one way or the other could dominate. Consider the 1995 referendum. If that had been decided via General Election you would have had a situation where both the UBP and the PLP were for Independence and yet the majority of the population was against. In that instance, only a small number of people were for Independence but there would have been no other choice the electorate could choose in order to voice opposition.

Moreover, as others have pointed out, in General Elections we ostensibly vote for our local representative in our constituency in order to represent local issues whether or not they eventually form the ruling Government.

If Independence is the dominant issue, we may have to vote against our local interests or desert our party allegiances in order to make a statement on the issue of destiny. If we are to prize democracy at all, Independence should be decided via referendum as general elections are an unsuitable vehicle for such a decision.

We should all welcome the discussion but be honest and democratic in making the most important decision of our nation?s destiny. To do otherwise would be to degrade our purpose.

JONATHAN YOUNG

Smith?s Parish