Size does matter

December 15, 2005

Dear Sir,

What a howler: "They are all slightly over the legal limit but it's not that great."

With that gem, TCD has given the green light to the Honda CRV to jockey for space with the rest of us fully legal road users. Bumper to bumper, without the spare tyre, it's "slightly" illegal being a half or quarter inch over the 175 inch limit. With the tyre it's seven inches illegal, except that the TCD examiners claim to have leeway to pick an arbitrary pair of points to determine the legal length of the car. The Motor Car Amendment Act (3) 2004, which describes the registration dimensions for Class H is very specific, "Where the length overall - ? exceeds 4293 mm (169 ins.) but does not exceed 4445 mm (175 ins.)". No wiggle room there, accurate to the millimetre and no leeway to call it bumper to bumper if the whim takes you. Slightly illegal is like slightly pregnant. In the past dealers had the option to cut down bumpers and remove wheel-well flares to fit the bill or not offer the vehicle. If it's all open to interpretation perhaps they'd be kind enough to measure my car between the front and back seats so I can pay a Class A licence fee.

We share the road with too many oversized vehicles as it is. I have little desire to dodge fleets of distracted, 9 lb soccer moms driving main battle tanks with one hand for the Crackberry and the other on the double shot latte as they careen between Kindermusic, Pilates and the yacht club. I shudder to think how many megawatts of "Armageddon Mk V" subwoofer can be stuffed in the back of one more fat, pimped ride with spinning hubcaps and E.T. landing lights; flown at low level by a stoned, Dale Earnhardt wannabe, cross eyed and delirious from the sound pressure.

I own a hatchback so I can get out by the tailgate when I use parking lots marked for cars of the 1950s. These monstrosities will need the bays fore and aft as well, just to clear the right of way. The size restrictions exist for very practical reasons. Class H is an abomination but having made the rule, TCD should have the decency to enforce it.

Has she lost her mind?

December 21, 2005

Dear Sir,

I am in utter disbelief that a politician can be "fed up" with an international charity organisation asking for more money. Has she lost her mind or is she in a state of idiocy? I have one thing to say to her and that is ... $11 million to cricket ? $450,000 to charity.

Bermuda if you want to move ahead and stop having your countrymen/women shake their collective heads at comments made by your politicians, then it's time for Government to rid the House of ignoramuses. This woman needs to spend some time at the local Salvation Army to see what she is "fed up" with.

Shame on all of you

December 20, 2005

Dear Sir,

I thought the concept behind the Human Rights Act was protection for minorities, or those groups in our society that could be the subject of discrimination.

It is unbelievable that the Government did not include sexual orientation when they amended the act last year. This year they are so nervous about Renee's Webb's amendment they have scuttled the latest bill on Human Rights indefinitely. Every civilised country in the world acknowledges this group of people in their Human Rights legislation, but hush, let's not talk about those gays here on our rock.

The truth is that gays are everywhere; in our families, in Parliament, in our courts, our hospitals, our schools, our churches, our clubs. They are only human, and therefore deserve basic human rights.

Is Ms Webb the only MP with the conviction and strength to speak out on this issue? Shame on you all.

Misleading caption

December 21, 2005

Dear Sir

Thank you for the lovely photo of PALS Memorial Tree of Remembrance in the Washington Mall taken by Tamell Simons in today's (December 21, 2005).

May I, however, please ask you to print this letter to correct the misleading caption " ... to allow members of the public to purchase doves ..."

First of all, Mr. Editor, please allow me to make it perfectly clear that it has never been PALS' intention to use our special memorial trees as a fund raising project. The original idea of the trees (one also in Butterfield Bank) was brought to PALS by nurse Joanne Armstrong to allow those who have lost loved ones to cancer to remember them in an unusual and meaningful way by placing a bluebird of hope (not a dove) on the tree with a personal message. The response has been overwhelming with as many as 2,000 people (including many children) visiting the trees during the three weeks prior to Christmas. When a volunteer manning the tree is asked "how much", the reply is always "nothing", yet on almost every occasion an unsolicited donation is given.

Thank you for allowing me to point out this correction and in doing so may I also take this opportunity to thank all the hundreds and hundreds of kind friends who support us year after year in so many ways.

We are now completing the first 25 years of hands on care to cancer patients and in thanking our many supporters, may I also commend the wonderful PALS team of directors, nurses, volunteers and office staff who have made our existence possible. Over the last 25 years we have grown from a handful of patients and a few volunteers to well over 100 patients at any one time and some 70 volunteers. We have grown from one part-time nurse to five full-time nurses and from a management committee to a company limited by guarantee with a board of directors. We have also grown from a small very low key organisation to "one of Bermuda's best loved Charities"!

Thank you, thank you Bermuda and all very best wishes for a happy, peaceful and healthy 2006.

Rude bus driver

December 19, 2005

Dear Sir,

The letter in this morning's describing the behaviour of a female bus driver reminds me of a similar incident I witnessed about six months ago on the No. 3 bus while travelling from Hamilton to Flatts.

A group of tourists ? mother, father and two children ? asked the female bus driver before getting on the bus in Hamilton: "Is this the bus for the Aquarium?" Her gruff reply was brief and to the point "Huh. Ya gotta walk". For anyone not familiar with the No. 3 route, it travels along Middle Road to Flatts then turns right onto Harrington Sound Road, so the tourists would have to walk about 200 yards to the Aquarium. They were confused about the answer until a friendly lady passenger on the bus reassured them that they would only have a short walk to the Aquarium.

The lady passenger engaged the tourists in casual conversation during the journey and recommended that they get off the bus at the stop in front of the old Palmetto Bay Hotel, just after the bus turns onto Harrington Sound Road. However, the bus driver had other ideas. She stopped the bus halfway down Flatts Hill and told the tourists it was their stop. The lady passenger politely explained that if they got off around the corner on Harrington Sound Road they would not have to cross a busy road.

Oh my! The driver was furious. She told the lady to mind her own business and demanded that the tourists get off the bus. It was only when the lady insisted that they would be getting off at the next stop and other passengers supported her that the driver continued on, muttering rude remarks to the poor passengers until they got off the bus. Rather than being warm and fuzzy, this driver was more like a bear with a sore head! She was a far cry from the vast majority of bus drivers who are polite and helpful to the public.

In retrospect I am most upset with myself for failing to take action six months ago. This matter should have been reported to the director of PTB at the time.

Please rest assured, Mr. Editor, that in future I will not hesitate to make a formal complaint if I see a driver being rude to any customer, whether local or visitor, and I would urge other members of the public to do the same. I would suggest that the director of PTB take a trip down to Flatts and examine the scene as I have described it. Would he advise visitors heading for the Aquarium to get off the No. 3 bus at the stop halfway down Flatts Hill where they will have no alternative than to cross a busy street with no pedestrian crossing, or would he advise that they get off at the bus stop just around the corner on Harrington Sound Road which is closer to the Aquarium, and allows them to stay on the same sidewalk all the way to the Aquarium.

Holding us to ransom?

December 2, 2005

Dear Sir,

I totally agree with a recent letter writer regarding British Airways. I, along with many other BA customers, cannot understand why the airfare between Bermuda and the UK has to be so high, when they make a longer journey to the US for a much lower rate. It's like they're holding us to ransom and have a monopoly on the route. Granted, we did, at one time, have superb service and facilities on the flights which compensated in some way for the cost and cramped seating conditions, but now, supposedly for economic reasons, the conditions have been cut back and the fares seem to be higher and higher. As a senior citizen I can no longer afford the expense of two visits per year to see my family nor can family members afford to visit Bermuda. Two adults and two children's fares just kills any hope of enjoying this beautiful but expensive Island.

The other complaint I and many others have is that there is a bug known in Bermuda as the BA bug.

There are few passengers who travel this route who don't pick up flu-like symptoms which last for a week or more thus spoiling the short stay in the UK and making it impossible to return to work once back in Bermuda. I would suggest that perhaps this has to do with the fact that now smoking is not allowed on any flight, the recirculated air is not efficiently purified before it is circulated around the cabin again.

This appears to be a BA problem only since I and many friends travelled to the US this last summer and used many airlines for our trip and not one of us contracted any infections of any kind.

I am sure I speak for hundreds of people who would gladly travel by another airline if the BA monopoly were revoked and it is time that we, the would-be passengers, took some unified action to get the service we used to receive at a fairer cost.