I would like to express my sincere appreciation to the Honourable Ministers Eugene and Paula Cox and the Labour and Home Affairs staff. I recently had an emergency, which required a temporary passport being drawn up on a Saturday.

Once told of the emergency, Ms Cox called in her staff, despite it being their day off, and got things done in a prompt and efficient manner. No hassles, no complaints.

The next morning I was able to leave the Island on the first flight out. It was a great relief to be on my way to deal with my emergency without having any added stress. Had I not been able to leave, the uncertainty would have caused me great grief.

Again, I sincerely thank you as you never know what life may deal you and it was good to know that in a time of need I could count on my fellow Bermudians.

J. WEEKS Southampton Story omitted salient fact March 21, 2000 Dear Sir, Your front page story this morning, UK moves may test Island's mettle on tax transparency will be misleading to those interested in getting an accurate picture of how things sit as Britain discusses tax evasion with Bermuda and other overseas territories.

The story stresses how difficult these discussions may be in Bermuda's case, given the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer's determination to crack down on tax evasion on the one hand, and Bermuda's wish not to interfere with the right to privacy of legitimate business people on the other.

Your reporter told me he based his report, at least in part, on a story which appeared on Monday in the Financial Times.

But that newspaper accurately reported one very salient fact which yours did not -- that Bermuda had offered to negotiate a Tax Information Exchange Agreement with the UK Inland Revenue Department, like the one which exists now between Bermuda and the United States Treasury.

Such treaties define the circumstances under which information about individuals and companies can be exchanged between two governments and can therefore be a guarantee both that legitimate investigations into tax evasion will receive official co-operation, and that the privacy of law-abiding businessmen will be respected.

It was Bermuda's suggestion that such a pact should be negotiated as a way of reconciling the disparate concerns of the two countries. The UK's agreement to enter into a formal treaty, in essence with its own territory, is unique and can certainly be taken as a sign that the legitimacy of our status as an offshore business centre is being respected.

As a matter of interest, in order to negotiate this pact (and others which they will pursue with other overseas territories), the UK Government is going to have to pass its own special legislation. In the welter of information accompanying the release of the UK Budget today is an announcement that this legislation will be introduced in order to allow Inland Revenue to enter into Tax Information Exchange Agreements to allow "more effective two-way exchange of information with countries where there are significant transactions involving UK taxpayers''.

GAVIN SHORTO Director Government Information Services Majority was ignored March 17, 2000 Dear Sir, It would be most interesting to know what percentage of the people who have written to this newspaper in support of the appointment of William Hayward as Rector to Smith's Parish are actual regular members of the congregation of St. Mark's Church.

Those members who voiced their objection to the appointment and also signed the petition to the Bishop against the appointment, represented a clear majority of those whose names are included in the Parish Electoral Roll. It follows therefore that those who have written letters of support have been a minority.

In any democratic process the view of the majority must prevail in order for the system to work as it is designed to. This is the normal method of operation in the secular world and it should be the same in the Church.

Clearly at St. Mark's this was not the case and for this reason alone, despite whatever may have been said to cover up the questionable procedures applied, then those procedures were and will remain morally flawed.

As a former member of the St. Mark's Church family, I represented a minority opinion from a different angle. My opinion is that the Church must be seen to be beyond reproach. Can those who have the responsibility for leading the Anglican Communion in this Diocese honestly say that in this case the Church is beyond reproach? I think not! The views of the majority were not even considered by the Vestry whom they elected. I say this if for no other reason than that the Vestry never informed the congregation who the candidates were. This had always been done in the past at St. Mark's. In the democratic process that will follow at the next Parish AGM, it is most unlikely that the majority will re-elect the same vestry. Rev. Hayward will have lost the weak minority base of support that he has now.

The Leaders of the Anglican Communion will bear a heavy, and if you reflect upon it, an unnecessary responsibility. All should ask the question why in this case were the rights, the feelings and emotions of the majority "shareholders'' totally disregarded? This should be followed by the question who in reality has damaged the reputation of the Church and for what purpose? FORMER MEMBER OF ST. MARK'S FAMILY Sandys Parish Following the Bahamas March 10, 2000 Dear Sir, There is an old adage that says: "If we don't remember the mistakes of the past we will be forced to repeat them.'' Paula Cox may be too young to know what happened to the Bahamas but her father certainly is not. He has probably forgotten.

Thirty-four years ago the Bahamaian Government forced foreign banks and other businesses to hire and train only Bahamians. They then started to revoke the work permits of guest workers. The Government then nationalised banks and other foreign businesses.

I was on a British Airways plane going to Miami when several Canadian ex-workers embarked at Nassau, therefore I heard the story first hand.

Not long after that, Bahamas' troubles started.

Banks and businesses failed because the workers did not have the skills to run them. Tourism failed because once the country nationalised, workers felt they no longer had to put up with foreigners and started spitting on them and verbally abusing them.

It took the Bahamas nearly 30 years to recover.

Could Bermuda sustain a thirty-year financial drought? Unlike the Bahamas, we have no natural resources to fall back on.

Foreign companies owe Bermuda nothing. They can leave at any time and the Finance Ministry will lose its biggest cash cow. The financial house of cards will start to fall from the top down and huge tax returns will be lost, i.e: Exempt Companies, Banks, High Rents, Jobs, Construction, etc.

This time there will be nowhere to pass the buck, we certainly won't be able to blame the UBP for this one.

The exempted companies brought a massive financial windfall to Bermuda and it can disappear a lot more quickly than it came.

All this chaos in just 15 months. That's incredible.

CONCERNED Paget Stung by phone charges March 11, 2000 Dear Sir, Thank you for allowing me to use your space to seek help. I recently had a long holiday in Canada where I used my AT&T calling card so I wouldn't have to put my phone calls on relatives' bills.

Now that I have received the bill back in Bermuda I am horror-struck. The rate -- per-minute must have been astronomical, even for calls which are not "long distance'' where I was (I foolishly went through AT&T each time).

The Telephone Company here told me there is no recourse. They are the representative of AT&T here.

I've been fortunate enough to be able to pay this terrifying bill so my phone won't be cut off. The telephone company did offer me a minimum payment plan with a one percent finance charge.

I do not know what the answer to this is. Maybe there isn't one.

I still don't want to burden friends and relatives with my phone call charges when visiting them.

If anyone has any suggestions -- other than "using their phone and then paying them'' -- which would be cumbersome, please let me know.

My experience with the pre-paid cards last summer in the UK was anything but satisfactory -- redialling numerous numbers sometimes without success and worrying that the "time left'' would run out -- then having the amount of time left on the card go to waste. So please don't suggest that.

I welcome any other suggestions, so please call 236-3939.

CARLEEN CURRIE Paget