going on for years anyway.

Erwin Adderley says it is tacky and bad manners and pressures the airlines to give perks to Cabinet Ministers.

Joe Public thinks "now I know why I never get bumped up to business class, let alone first class''.

On the face of it, Transport Minister Dr. Brown telling airlines serving Bermuda that he and his Cabinet colleagues would accept upgrades -- if they were offered -- to first class, may be just that.

After all, the argument goes, Ministers in the United Bermuda Party happily accepted these upgrades for years and Dr. Brown was only making it clear that the new Government is content to carry on the practice, thus "allowing'' the airlines to perform good customer relations.

It is also believed that some of the less well-known Progressive Labour Party Ministers were not offered upgrades in the wake of the General Election. That put their noses out of joint because they knew their predecessors had been given upgrades. This appears to have been the impetus for the letter. By writing to the airlines, the Government was bringing this "problem'' to their attention.

It has to be said that airlines do give upgrades and free flights to their "friends''. This newspaper has accepted free flights when an airline is inaugurating a new service or a new feature. That in itself is a practice which would be frowned on in some newspapers and at the very least, any articles relating to the service should acknowledge the fact that a free flight was given.

The bigger question is this. Does an airline, having been informed of the Cabinet's willingness to accept upgrades, run the risk of getting on the Government's wrong side if it does not? And what is to stop the Government from "suggesting'' to, say, Fairmont Hotels that a Minister staying in a Fairmont (Princess) Hotel in the US would accept an "upgrade'' to the Presidential Suite, an "upgrade'' from a taxi to a limo for the trip to the Airport or an "upgrade'' from a $30 bottle of wine at dinner to a $200 bottle at dinner. From there, it's not much of a leap to allowing Bermuda's "partners'' to pay for the whole trip. After that, who is to say that the "partner'' will get a zoning change or some other advantage -- "in the national interest'' from the wined and dined Minister? But by the same token, will the airline that does not give the upgrade -- or refuses to turf a paying passenger out of his or her seat to make room for a Minister -- find itself getting parked at the far end of the Airport terminal or having its check-in desk moved? This is not to say that anything like this has happened, or will. What it does say is that somewhere along the line, good customer relations (or back-scratching) can become bribery, and failure to ante up can become punishable.

That is wrong. Bermuda cannot afford to develop a reputation for going to its partners with its cap out asking for favours for VIPs. Certainly Ministers should be given the respect their office deserves. By the same token, they should not demean the office by seeking -- or demanding -- perks and favours.

This may be a "storm in a tea cup'' and it may be no different from past practices. That does not make it right, nor did the Country expect quite so many "old'' practices to continue in the "new'' Bermuda.