Dear Sir, I read the letter from Ms Carol A. Bell, published in your paper of today's date with some concern.

First of all Cambridge does not have, and never has had, a policy of of not accepting "locals'' for lunch. We do have a policy of requesting reservations. This applies to all non-resident guests.

The reasons for this policy are very simple. Cambridge Beaches is striving to maintain five star standards of service that will match if not exceed standards found in the finest hotels of the world. Guests coming to stay at Cambridge Beaches are paying a great deal to stay with us and expect not to be kept waiting in line for any aspect of their service, particularly behind people who are not staying on the property.

We therefore do everything possible to ensure that every service we do offer is properly staffed and that we can provide the highest levels of service in everything we do. Individuals arriving without reservations can jeopardise our ability to provide excellence and we therefore, sometimes, have to refuse service believing either we could not provide the proper levels of service to them or that by taking them, such levels of service might be negatively impacted for our guests.

This situation was compounded by the fact that the incident apparently took place on Cup Match. We are required to give our staff one of the two days off so on each of those days we are effectively working with only 50 percent of staff. This places great strain on those that are working and, again, to maintain our level of service we must limit outside business.

There has been endless debate about the value Bermudian hotels are offering their guests. At Cambridge we are working very hard to ensure our guests receive such value in every aspect of their stay. Sometimes that means we have to restrict our facilities and limit the amount of outside business we accept.

I suggest that anyone going to, and staying at, a top resort property would expect no less.

I apologise to Ms Bell for any embarrassment or inconvenience but trust she will understand our position. I would have been delighted to explain our position in detail had Ms Bell elected to call me.

MICHAEL J. WINFIELD President & CEO Cambridge Beaches Who is Dr. Liburdy!? August 9, 1999 Dear Sir, With reference to the issue of cellular towers and electromagnetic fields (EMF), in June the US National Institute for Environmental Health (NIEHS) completed a five-year, $50 million investigation of EMF. They reported to the US Congress".... a fairly consistent pattern of small increased risk of childhood leukaemia with increasing exposure to EMF (from power lines)''. They classified EMF as a class 2B carcinogen -- possible carcinogen -- the same category that includes Carbon Tetrachloride, Chlordane, DDT, and Diesel Fuel amongst other substances.

Also in June of this year, the University of Toronto and the Toronto Hospital for Sick Children reported that they had taken measurements of the magnetic fields in the homes of 201 children diagnosed with leukaemia in the Toronto area between 1985 and 1993, and compared them with those of 406 healthy children. When relocations, power use and the child's medical history were taken into account, children exposed to high magnetic fields were 4.5 times more likely to develop leukaemia.

Such associations of EMF with cancer have previously been documented in several countries and the link was endorsed in a US Environmental Protection Agency report as far back as 1990. The biological reason for the statistical link is not well understood and this has been a cause for skepticism and an excuse for inaction, cultivated by EMF emitting industries and their supporters.

Principal author of the NIEHS report, Dr. Chris Portier, has just stated that the Liburdy case has no impact whatsoever on their conclusions.

Furthermore Dr. Liburdy is not associated in any capacity with the above-mentioned organisations in Toronto, or the EPA etc.

Many may say "Liburdy? Who is Dr. Liburdy?'' Exactly! According to the news media, Dr. Liburdy is very important, much more so than the findings of the University of Toronto or of the NIEHS which were not widely reported. The Royal Gazette followed this pattern when, disappointingly, you printed a large article about the Liburdy case in your August 2 issue and concluded that it has significance in the local debate about cellular towers. Your reporter failed to recognise that in nine months of debate here in Bermuda, not once has an opinion or publication of Dr.

Liburdy has cited.

To quote a letter to the Editor of the Toronto Globe and Mail: "The story of alleged fraud in research of EMF by Dr. Robert Liburdy of Lawrence Berkely Labs caused a giddy feeding frenzy in the media. The Associated Press writers were so excited they got his name wrong... It is 20 years, and the media has managed to avoid getting to the bottom of the story of electromagnetic fields.'' I do, however, give credit to your reporter for partially balancing the story by seeking the comments of Dr. David Carpenter. Rightly, Dr. Carpenter said that there was something deceitful in the presentation of the facts of the Liburdy case and in the exaggeration of its significance.

Government authorities and independent centres of learning are speaking, and the only properly qualified expert to visit Bermuda and examine the cellular tower situation here has spoken. Attempts by anyone to now claim that operation of short, poorly regulated cellular towers in residential areas poses no health risk must be viewed with great suspicion and it is the responsibility of an independent media to adopt this approach.

Those who operate these towers, permit their operation, own land where they operate, aid and abet construction or operation of these towers in the face of documented public or private objection need to examine their liabilities. This is not a problem that will go away. It is a problem, which is coming.

Yes, people will continue to bleat about possible serious health effects on their children caused by the invasion of neighbourhoods by companies such as CellularOne. True, children are not turtles or fish or toads or coral reefs or open spaces or old buildings or powerful lobbyists and so are not deserving of the maximum sympathy, support or protection in Bermuda but silly as it seems, we remain hopeful on their behalf.

FRIEND OF HUMAN BEINGS Warwick Angry at BA's service August 9, 1999 Dear Sir, We have been back several weeks but waited to write this letter as we are so upset and mad with BA.

In March we booked and paid for three full-fare return tickets to the UK (flying in June), two adults and our 18-month old daughter. We knew we did not have to buy a seat for our daughter (she's young enough to travel on one of our laps) but chose to do so as we knew this would be better for her and better for those around us on the plane (she is very active). We requested bulkhead seats to also ensure there was no one in front of us.

For whatever reason BA generally don't let you chose your seat when you book and pay (do they know how irritating this is?) but we accepted this may be appropriate for the bulkhead seats. We were told to ring before departure.

It's worth noting we were told that we had priority for these seats as we had paid a full fare for our daughter. The day before departure we were told we had three seats together on the bulkhead -- all this pre-flight inconvenience made seemed worth while as we had our three seats together.

Our departure experience leads us to believe we should sue BA for the distress caused to us.

At Bermuda check-in we were told NO we did not have three seats together, there were two on the bulkhead and one in the row behind! How could this happen we asked. The supervisor at the Airport said: "I changed the seating allocation this morning and it's a full flight so we can't do anything.'' Wow, blew us away -- all our efforts and the assurances received gone, just as you are boarding a plane for a six hour flight. What arrogance on their part.

On the plane it got worse, (have you guessed), yes the two seats were not together but across the aisle from each other. So a family of three finds they can't even get two seats together and what do the crew say to help... "sorry it's a full flight there's nothing we can do!'' Total garbage -- tell me why standby passengers got on that plane and got three seats together -- we were first on so why could BA not radio the main ticket desk to see if there were any no shows -- they could not be bothered that's why.

If it wasn't for the kindness and generosity of Don & Vi Jolliffe who gave up their own seats and sat in two of ours we would have had no option but to get off the plane -- would anyone have taken off with their 18-month old infant sitting on her own, next to an aisle and a complete stranger? BA is this not total negligence on your part? The lack of honesty (they could have contacted us before we set off for the airport, been open about the situation at the check-in desk) is very annoying.

The complete lack of action when there was action to take is just unacceptable.

We will take this sorry affair up with BA executive but to all travellers be wary of what they tell you before you fly and sadly be prepared for anything when you get to the Bermuda Airport. Bring on Virgin Atlantic! THE WILSONS Southampton Not thought out properly August 6, 1999 Dear Sir, I am writing in connection with the suggested new Act which will allow management workers to join the same union as the rank and file.

Obviously this move has not been thought out properly by the PLP members of Parliament or the President of the BIU, in his capacity as head of Bermuda's largest Union. The people who will suffer from this extraordinary move will be, of course, the BIU workers themselves.

In the past, when the BIU has called one of their numerous strikes against the hotels in Bermuda, the management were forced to step in and -- to the best of their ability -- at least keep the hotels operating. This meant that the hotels were (with the exception of the Island-wide strike in May 1981), able to remain open with management cleaning rooms, serving in the dining room and generally doing everything they could to keep operating.

With this new Act, the management will be forced to go on strike along with everyone else and the hotels will have no option but to close their doors.

With the enormous losses that the hotels are presently suffering, I doubt whether they will reopen.

To the BIU workers, I must tell you that if this happens, you will not get redundancy payments, since you left the job and no redundancy payments will be due to you since the choice was yours, not the hotels in question. I suggest you ask the BIU President if the BIU will be responsible for any redundancy payments you would have otherwise received.

The PLP Government unfortunately has no idea whatsoever how businesses operate and, I think, care less. They will only realise the benefits of having proper functioning businesses when it is too late. This latest move will be the final straw for the struggling hotel industry here.

JUST ASKING City of Hamilton Competition needed August 9, 1999 Dear Sir, I feel compelled to respond to the business article "What a Total Mockery'' published August 5. I think the article reported events fairly, but it seems to miss a key issue -- Why do Bermudians find themselves in a situation where telephone calls get priced on a par with third world countries? Bermuda sits in the Atlantic Ocean only 681 miles from New York, but I can call New York from Australia for a one fourth of what the equivalent call cost from Bermuda.

It seems a scandal that the Ministry of Telecommunications could take so long to embrace competition. Debates about opening telecommunications to competition have occurred throughout the world in the last few years, and none have ever ended with the conclusion that ended with the conclusion that end users will get better served by preserving a monopoly. The level of competition present in the market predicts very well the quality of service and user friendly pricing. Telecom pricing in Bermuda significantly handicaps the Island in effort to attract the growing e-commerce industry.

There exists many reference cases demonstrating the value of competition in telecommunications. Consider, for example, another former Cable & Wireless monopoly, Hong Kong, where prices have fallen by 50 percent or more since the beginning of the year. Bermuda will remain a telecommunications island as long as the government of Bermuda isolates Cable & Wireless from competition.

The losses faced by stunted business growth and the inability of citizens to communicate with the outside world will become more and more apparent as the rest of the world embraces competitive telecommunications markets.

LISA CIMICATA General Manger, Caribbean Operations TelecomCompters.com Clean up this mess! August 9, 1999 Dear Sir, Whatever happened to our saying "Keep Bermuda Beautiful'' and doing whatever we can to "Keep Bermuda Beautiful''! You look at Par-la-Ville Road and the end of Reid Street extension, which reeks of waste and foul odours from all the restaurants there. Why are they not told to scrub once a week to clean up their stench? Also, at the end of Reid Street, where about six restaurants operate, why are they not forced to clean up their mess too, make the outside of their places presentable with fine terra cotta planters with wonder plants and wash, sanitise and clean up their territory. It is appalling to have to walk down these streets or even go into these restaurants having to view and smell their debris even before you enter these establishments.

Can the Corporation of Hamilton not put into effect a law, which states that all such restaurants have to be responsible to keep the area surrounding their establishment washed, disinfected and cleaned? We are really starting to look like a very unsanitary, "New York City'' island and "Keeping Bermuda Beautiful'' is not the top of such restaurants list. The business, private community alike I am sure must see this ongoing problem, and we certainly do not look great for our visiting tourists.

Please do something about it. Bermuda is getting so commercialised, and the city of Hamilton is now a "concrete jungle'' new laws should be looked at to make businesses keep their establishments clean and presentable. Plus, if they are that dirty outside, can you imagine how they keep their premises inside.

Not a good first or lasting impression.

A VERY CONCERNED BERMUDIAN Pembroke Bring Mark Trail back August 10, 1999 Dear Sir, In this world of high rising stress and forever changing times it is comforting to know that some things do remain the same. This was also true of the Mark Trail comic strip that was in your paper. It is far superior to what has replaced it. Where is Mark? Has he lost the tail? Can he be found www.mtrail.com.e - back? FYI. There are still some of us who like to sit back, relax, pour a cup of coffee and anxiously leaf through the paper to find our old favourites i.e.

Mark Trail.

If I had my way, the comics would be on the front page and the rest would be on the cutting room floor, especially the political `comics' of our time.

Please point me in the direction of the Trail. I'd rather follow Mark! MR. RONALD C. WILLIAMS Southampton