Jamaica Observer

Dear Editor,

In his letter of March 5, 2013, Jason Maddon asserts that a woman's "right to choose" is based on her rights to freedom, security and privacy. The term is a dubious euphemism for a "right to abortion", as if women who keep their pregnancies are not also making a choice.

The writer also alludes to the right to life as included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It should be clear that the right of a pregnant woman to freedom and privacy are not absolute and cannot be equal to the right to life of her unborn child. One of these rights must take precedence. The prioritisation of these rights is a matter of one's worldview, and all laws and public policy are based on some world view. They do not arise out of a vacuum.

If one holds a secular world view with the implication of no transcendence and man being mere matter, not only will aborting the inconvenient foetus be justifiable, but also the killing of the inconvenient infant. Indeed prominent ethicists like Peter Singer assert that infanticide is ethical on the same grounds as abortion.

In February 2012, Alberto Giublini and Francesca Minerva advocated for "after-birth abortion" in the Journal of Medical Ethics. The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) has existed for almost three decades, yet millions of female babies are being selectively aborted. The forced, one child policy in China and the desire of couples for male offspring, means a death sentence for girls in the womb. The dowry system in India similarly makes a female baby a "curse" for many women, so once identified by Ultrasonography, females are aborted. Those who escape may still be killed after birth. If challenged, the Indian lady could no doubt assert her rights to freedom, security and privacy. I would appeal to advocates for women's rights to demand that CEDAW be implemented to protect the most fundamental of all rights at all stages of a woman's life. Let us have equal rights for unborn women!

Dr Doreen Brady-West

drbradywest@gmail.com

Equal rights for the unborn

-->

Dear Editor,

As many countries including Jamaica continue to grapple with extremely high energy costs, the debate continues to rage regarding what are the viable alternatives that will allow for a less costly and sustainable outcome that reduces dependence on fossil fuels.

As a youth advocate, this particular issue affects everyone and especially our youth. I did some research to identify some tips that our Government and key stakeholders should take into consideration. These tips include:

* The need for family planning. We have to make this readily available as the world races toward a population of 9 billion by 2050. Effective birth control needs to be made available to families to help limit ever-growing demand for limited resources. Research has also noted that empowering women to time their pregnancies would reduce carbon emissions significantly. This step alone would provide 8 to 15 per cent of the reductions needed to avert climate change;

* Banning landfills to force reductions in waste and re-using any waste that is produced;

* Finding ways to prioritise long-term, rather than short-term, decision making, including through reducing requirements for quarterly reporting by companies;

* Turning the power of public procurement toward greener purchasing;

* The need for political will and good policy will drive these needed shifts;

* Fossil fuel subsidies, especially for particularly polluting fuels like diesel, need to be phased out over time;

* We need to accelerate the 'circular' economy where resources are carefully conserved and, once used, are recovered, recycled and used again.

According to Karl Falkenberg of the European Commission: "We need to do things differently", and this doing things differently has to start fairly rapidly. The reality is that over 90% of Jamaica's electricity is produced from petroleum-based fuel coupled with outdated infrastructure. There has been talk about what needs to be done, but we must act now as our economy and livelihoods depend on action.

Javan Campbell

Programme Officer

Jamaica Youth Advocacy Network

How can we get to the 'Greener Economy'?

-->

Dear Editor,

The March 4 edition of the Jamaica Observer carried an article entitled 'Mom's tell: How to deal with kids misbehaving in public.' A more fitting title would be "Moms tell how they deal with kids misbehaving in public."

The survey revealed the common tendency of women to deal with misbehaving kids with some form of physical punishment. Out of the nine people who gave their opinion, six women would apply some kind of physical pain to the child, two women used psychological methods, and one ignored the misbehaviour by allowing the "bawling" to continue while she went on with her work. Although slapping, clapping, smacking, squeezing and pinching may get an immediate reaction and cessation of misbehaviour, they can lead to more serious effects later on. These methods are learned behaviours through culture and the mother's own parents' style of discipline.

If mothers accept the fact that children do and will misbehave, they must plan for an assertive method of discipline which teaches the child rather than punishes the child. Moreover, if the parent is consistent in showing affection when the child is being well-behaved, the child will associate the affection with good behaviour.

Withholding treats rather than rewarding with treats, as one of the women stated, is also better than slapping or hitting the child. Some children will continue to misbehave, even if it results in negative attention. When the parent observes this, he or she should change the strategy.

Raising children is a thinking job, and certainly is not like raising cattle. Children are all different, so what works for one child doesn't work for another. Why would we take a one-step approach like pinching, spanking or flogging, to discipline?

AM Ansari

stop1998@aol.com

Teach the child instead of punishing him

-->

Dear Editor,

"Your refusal of entry was not, in any way, related to your nationality, but with the answers that you gave to immigration. Mr Merlo Reid, when he placed the cancelled stamp in your passport, told you that you misrepresented when you said that you were staying with Pamela Clarke," he said.

After reading the above paragraph in the article "Four more witness to take stand in Myrie case", I came to the conclusion that the CARICOM is more like CARI-GO-BRING-COM and must be disbanded if this kind of treatment continues.

Anyway, before we start to rant, we might want to define "freedom of movement." Let's look at what it means in the European Union. It means: (1) Look for a job in another EU country, (2) work there without needing a work permit, (3) reside there for that purpose, (4) stay there even after employment has finished and (5) enjoy equal treatment with nationals in access to employment, working conditions and other social and tax advantages.

Why did the immigration officer in Barbados check Myrie's passport and stamped it after she left Jamaica? It doesn't work like that in the EU. If, for example, I am travelling from Brussels to Helsinki, at the check-in counter in Brussels I am asked to show my ID/passport so that the personnel can see if the name on the ID/passport matches the name on the ticket.

Why did the immigration officer in Barbados check Myrie's passport and stamped it after she left Jamaica? It doesn't work like that in the EU. If, for example, I am travelling from Brussels to Helsinki, at the check-in counter in Brussels I am asked to show my ID/passport so that the personnel can see if the name on the ID/passport matches the name on the ticket.

Before boarding the plane, I might be asked to show my ID/passport along with my boarding pass. After I reach Helsinki airport, I simply walk straight to the luggage section and collect my luggage and then walk out from the airport without talking to another person.

For freedom of movement to work, all the signatory countries should have two sections at their airports, one for international flights and the other for passengers travelling within the CARICOM.

Switzerland recently joined the Schengen Area and its border is 99% open. The one per cent check-in is for people trying to sneak across the border without a vignette (road tax). Switzerland and many other countries in Europe charged motorists a road tax to use the roads. With the two sections at the airport, a passenger will only get checked at the departing airport by showing his or her ID/passport to verify his or her name. When you reach your destination, you simply walk straight out of the plane to the luggage department to collect your luggage and, if you don't have luggage to collect, then you simply walk out of the airport without saying howdy to anyone.

If the freedom of movement is not working like that in the CARICOM, then the whole thing is a fraud. The problem with CARICOM is that some countries are jealous of other countries, some countries don't trust other countries' citizens, some countries have one foot in and one foot out and some countries' behaviour towards the black race have Martin Luther King, Marcus Garvey, Bob Marley and the rest of the late civil rights leaders turning over in their graves.

The countries within the CARICOM must realise by now that the population within the CARICOM is 90% black, which means that immigration officers at the airports around the CARICOM will continue to see more black people than white. I am of the opinion that race played a part is this debacle in Barbados. It is an open secret that some persons in Barbados despise black people.

Hero Scott

herocarlito@yahoo.com

Free up travel in the Caribbean

-->

Dear Editor,

Do you recall in April of 2008 when then Minister of Finance, Audley Shaw, announced the tax amnesty? Senator Don Wehby, who was part of the ministry at the time, indicated that it would not be repeated.

Since then we have seen a Transport Authority vehicle amnesty and more recently Dr Phillips' traffic ticket amnesty. There have been a myriad of amnesties before and there will still be others.

In 2005, then Minister of Finance Dr Omar Davies announced the ludicrous Transfer Tax amnesty. I wonder how many Government ministers immediately benefited? It indicates to me that if I wait long enough, I can get out of paying just about any penalty, or even the tax itself. I don't ever hear in the aftermath of these amnesties that the Government has increased or changed anything. What then is the real incentive for making use of these amnesties?

One thing I am sure of is that any pragmatic Jamaican who has seen his property taxes jump by more that 100% in the last month and heard that land value will increase by year-end is simply waiting on the property tax amnesty to 'land'. I don't believe the Government is in the habit of selling land to pay taxes and that must certainly make non-compliance easy. Without a doubt, if you cannot find the owner of the land, you can find the land, making this one of the easiest taxes to enforce.

The Minister should know that it is very unlikely that the land will up and walk off. If the doctor is serious about revenue collection, he must ensure compliance by enforcement. Non-compliance is an ill that needs to be cured ... not forgiven.

Robert Howell

roberthowelljm@yahoo.com

Government must enforce the law

-->

Dear Editor,

Regarding your front page story in the Sunday Observer about the discrimination of Jamaicans going to Barbados, the discrimination only starts at the airport in Barbados.

I have heard horror stories from Jamaicans who visited as tourists and some who live there. One couple were refused service in a restaurant just because they were Jamaicans and the treatment is widespread by the general population of Barbados against Jamaicans.

I have a self-imposed boycott against that country and all Jamaicans and the Government should do likewise.

Wickham Jamadar

Toronto, Canada

Not going to Barbados

-->

Dear Editor,

The archaic laws and procedures on our law books, and the "People's Justice" in Jamaica, are different from international standards and norms.

In the recent acquittal of Sergeant Lloyd Kelly, who was charged with the killing of murder suspect, Ian Lloyd, the citizens of Buckfield, St Ann, praised the acquittal, saying "Justice has been served."

We saw what was on the video and we can make the reasonable deduction that the police officers were not in any life-threatening danger, and we could argue that Sergeant Kelly firing his weapon may be deemed as use of excessive force by most standards.

Sergeant Kelly must count his lucky stars and be thankful for the laws and procedures that we have on our law books, and also the mentality of our citizens.

The law stipulates that the person who shoots the video must turn up in court to testify to the authenticity of the video and so must the coroner who carried out the autopsy. No witness would testify against the police; the coroner left the island, and his coroner's report was not tendered in evidence.

In keeping with the mentality of our citizens that "criminals, murderers,"teef" and gunmen fi dead"; citizens rained blows on Ian Lloyd, who was described as "a menace to the community." Sergeant Kelly was praised by Buckfield citizens.

There is no doubt that Ian Lloyd was shot - two bullets to his body from Kelly's gun. The question is, did the bullets from Kelly's gun cause Lloyd's death, or was his death a result of the blows that citizens rained on him? John Public saw the video footage and it shows what transpired before and after the suspect was shot.

The rule of law must be paramount and justice must be served to all. Citizens should not be allowed or tacitly given the approval to take the law into their own hands.

We need legislators who will correct the wrongs that pervade our justice system and our society. If nothing changes, then we all will, sooner or later, suffer the consequences of the non-action of our 'eat a food 60' politicians.

Authnel Reid

Authnelreid@optonline.net

Authnel_reid@merck.com

We need to change our old laws

-->

Dear Editor,

As a former employee of the National Housing Trust (NHT), where I held the position of Director of Mortgage Operations, I wish to make the following points to clarify some misconceptions being discussed in the public sphere concerning the operation of the NHT and the proposed drawdown of $45 billion from the Trust over the next four years:

(1) During the period 1976 to the mid 1980s, selection of beneficiaries was done on the Random Selection System. The selection process was changed in the mid-1980s to what was called the Priority Entitlement Index (PEI) System. The PEI System was based on the selection of persons who were closer to housing schemes financed by the Trust. The reality is that even when persons were selected, the question of affordability was required. I recall vividly the case of a teacher who applied and got selected for a housing unit in Mineral Heights and whose salary could not qualify her for the unit. She wept uncontrollably in my office when she realised that after 25 years of teaching, she was not able to take up the benefit. Affordability is key to getting a benefit from the Trust.

(2) The NHT, although having "Trust" as a part of its name, does not operate like a Trust company in its classical sense. There has never been an annual meeting of contributors to examine the financial statements and to select trustees to oversee the operation of the entity. The Government of Jamaica, through the relevant minister, is the one who selects the Board of Directors, not the contributors. This is a clear contrast between the NHT and credit unions, where contributors select their Board of Directors and approve the distribution of surplus.

(3) In the absence of receiving a mortgage from the NHT, the only entitlement there for each contributor, is to receive a refund of his contributions every seven years, so long as there is continuous employment and where the employer files annual returns identifying how much each employee contributes for each year.

(4) Apart from financing scheme units, the NHT provides mortgages for Build-On-Own-Land (BOL) and Home Improvement (HI) and Open Market (OM) units. These policies may change from time to time. Up to the mid-eighties, all scheme units did not require a deposit on equity. It is my understanding that this policy has been changed, no doubt based on past experience. I recall that shortly after the 1980 election, persons were driven out of units in Bay Farm Villas, Trench Town and Mountain View schemes by so-called bad men. Many keys to these units were returned. The NHT lost a lot of money on these schemes.

(5) Persons who received BOL and HI loans had their refundable contributions applied to their loans. The same principle was applied to scheme units.

(6) Employers' contributions are presently non-refundable and consequently are not eligible for a benefit. It is my opinion that different rules are applied to two sets of contributors. I would like to advise the Government to change the employers' contribution to a tax which goes to the Consolidated Fund. With the buildup of the Reserve Fund, the NHT can finance its mortgages without the employers' portion. This will ensure that no future Government will have to amend laws to source NHT funds.

(7) Finally, NHT surplus funds could go towards financing indigent houses and units affected by natural disasters. By so doing, the mandate of the Trust would not be compromised, as these are not contributors' money, but funds generated by proper management after expenses are cleared. Housing Trust funds should not be used to invest in Government bonds, as the taxpayers are the ones who are called upon to fund these interest incomes for the Trust by way of taxation by the Government.

Ralvey Bryan

Portmore

Make those changes at NHT now

-->

Dear Editor,

I am a contributor to the National Housing Trust and I have received an NHT benefit. Unfortunately, most contributors to the Trust cannot say the same. The vast majority of hardworking Jamaicans who contribute to the NHT can only look forward to a refund of their contributions after seven years. The NHT has failed to fulfil its mandate to provide housing solutions for Jamaicans. That is why the assertion that there are 'surplus' funds in the NHT is false and misleading. There could only be a surplus if all contributors had received a benefit and there was money left over.

One of the reasons the NHT says it has been unable to provide more housing solutions is that it has been unable to acquire suitable lands at a fair price.

The members of the Board of the NHT who have spoken publicly about the Government's drawdown of NHT funds have gone to great lengths to try to convince us that removing $45 billion from their coffers will not affect their operations in any way (amazing!), and that it is the loyal and patriotic thing to do. They feel that there should be no challenge to the legality of the issue. I am disappointed with the Board. My question is, "who are they loyal to?'" It does not seem to be the contributors.

The Government is the largest landowner in Jamaica. It finds itself in a bind and needs the NHT's money. The NHT needs land. The Board has the perfect opportunity to insist on the Government, through its agency the UDC, to sell the NHT prime lands suitable for housing development at a fair price... a fair price of $45 billion, not the $1 that the Government has sold many of its assets for.

The beauty about buying this land with 'surplus money' is that the NHT would not have to factor the cost of the land into the price of the houses (they were going to give away the money anyway).

Institutions that are cash-strapped sell their property. The government is no stranger to this. Foreign countries, corporations and indeed, wealthy Jamaicans have bought many of this country's assets for a song. Why can't hardworking Jamaicans get something for their money?

Simon Casserly

simoncasserly@gmail.com

Housing Trust has failed

-->

Dear Editor,

Where have our markets in Eastern St Thomas gone? Over the last 40 years, we had the following markets operating at full capacity with all kinds of agricultural products for sale:

Golden Grove (going now at 25%)

Duckenfield (now closed)

Bath (now closed)

Port Morant (now closed)

Why were the markets closed and can they be reopened? I hope that agricultre minister Roger Clarke, (good minister) can and will address the shortages in Eastern St Thomas.

All the people have to be bundling up in the badly-kept Morant Bay market building, rain or shine, (it leaks when it rains) and due to the shortage of agricultural produce, prices soar each week.

I've heard and read of the good work that minister Clarke has been doing in the "Bread Basket" of St Elizabeth. We in Eastern St Thomas are praying for God to bless him, and hope that those in his ministry will join him in shining a portion of the lights on us in Eastern St Thomas.

That will guide our footsteps while we move into a brighter tomorrow and have more to eat.

JA Bailey

Dalvey, St Thomas

Fewer markets in St Thomas

-->

Dear Editor,

This morning (March 13) the popular radio show host, Jenny Jenny, offered erroneous commentary when she likened the government's new IMF-driven policies and strategies to communism. No Jenny Jenny, these are capitalist strategies, driven by an external funding agency that was specifically set up to ensure the sustainability of capitalism, at times when the inevitable crises may cause nations to opt out of that system in their quest for survival.

Socialist and communist policies and strategies favour the working class, farmers, women, students, teachers, nurses, doctors - everyone except those who seek to amass excessive wealth at the expense of the rest of the nation. One of the primary aims of socialist and communist policies is poverty eradication. The policies and strategies that the government is pursuing will create more poverty, unemployment and homelessness, and force more people to get involved in criminal activities as a means of survival. Socialist and communist governments engage the population in decision-making on crucial issues, not just the business class.

The late Hugo Chavez was leading a peaceful socialist revolution in Venezuela. Under his leadership, poverty was reduced from 70.8% to 21% between 1996 and 2010, spending on social programmes was increased by 60.6%, and education is free from day care to university. The socialist country, Cuba, which experienced 2.5% economic growth in 2012, without an IMF deal, has eradicated illiteracy and provides free health care and free education at all levels, including continuing education. Cuba engaged over eight million of its approximately 11-million population in the discussion of its proposed new economic guidelines. Three million people made recommendations for changes. That is real people's democracy in action.

The fact is that Jamaica has been run by capitalist governments since independence in 1962. There was a slight detour from 1972 to 1980, but Jamaica remains locked within the capitalist system, and this makes it very vulnerable to the inevitable crises of capitalism. Unless we abandon capitalism, we will be having déjà vu over and over again, as the poor, all working people and students, will continue to be called upon to bear the burden of repeated efforts to rescue the system.

Jenny Jenny, it is commendable that you are trying to discuss serious issues on your show. The fact that you are working in the mass media means that you are in a position to inform and educate even in light commentary. Therefore, you have a responsibility to get the facts right.

Barbara Reynolds, PhD

babsyreynolds@gmail.com

Get the facts, Jenny Jenny

-->

Dear Editor,

Parliament made a very strange decision recently. It decided to outlaw flogging, on the grounds that it is inhumane and is a relic of slavery. However, in coming to this decision, it forgot another inhumane law that can also be regarded as a relic of slavery - hanging.

According to our lawmakers, flogging had to go, as it was wrong in all aspects. But if flogging is so wrong, why is hanging still right?

If my memory servers me right, I am sure that slaves were once hanged for falling out of line. I would have also thought that hanging would have been a worse form of punishment than flogging, seeing that while the intent of flogging is to preserve life, that for hanging was to end it. What more "inhumane" treatment is there than chocking one to death at the end of a rope?

I don't usually consider the morality of issues like these. If flogging served a beneficial purpose, then I would have no problem with preserving those laws in respect of it. However, what beneficial purpose does hanging serve?

All of the studies that have been done around the world have shown that the death penalty does not serve as any form of deterrent. That's why many countries are moving away from it. While hanging may have some political value, the time has long passed for the practice to be halted.

Plus, there are several downsides to hanging. Unlike flogging, where a person flogged wrongly can be compensated, there is no compensation for a person once he has been hanged wrongly. How can the dead be compensated if it turns out that his execution was done in error?

I have always said that hanging someone will not deny that person something that he or the rest of us will not get anyway - death. Therefore, instead of hanging, why not make the most of the condemned?

We could use their "free" labour for many construction projects. Why not create labour camps out of these convicts? Also, there are many people who need organ transplants. Why not use these convicts as reliable sources of organs?

The good thing about making the most of these condemned persons instead of hanging them, is obvious. We could get more work done for less and their organs could actually be used to save lives. Also, and this is perhaps the best part - if it turns out that they were innocent, restitution can still be made to them.

Let us really be truthful when we talk about the need to enhance our human rights. If flogging is bad, hanging is much worse. Let's ban hanging too.

Michael A Dingwall

michael_a_dingwall@hotmail.com

We should ban hanging too

-->

Dear Editor,

I watched the Dan Rather report on the lotto scam featuring Jamaica and listened to the many online criticism of the cruel and heartless nature of these scammers, preying on senior citizens of the United States and the snide comments about the ineffectiveness of our law enforcements not doing much about it.

I'm very sympathetic to those who have lost money to these scammers, as most Jamaicans know too well the loss of hard earned money due to schemes such as Olint and Cash Plus among others.

While I'm in support of most of the views about these scammers I must admit that the reports, the comments and the overall conversations are too emphatically focused on the criminals and their deeds, one should also look at the victims, not only in a pitiful gesture but also in a culpable manner.

"If it sounds too good to be true, then it probably is." Too often this saying is ignored and you have heard of these things time and again to be caught up in it.

How can someone lose up to $400,000 in such a scam? Let's face the facts, if you live in the United States and have savings amounting to $200,000 or more, it could be easily said that you are among some of the richest in the country. To get a phone call advising you of becoming an instant millionaire when you did not even buy a lotto ticket, and to be grabbing after it amounting to loss of so much of your savings plus your house, is downright greedy.

Whilst this story can be described as criminality to one extreme, it can also be described as "the greedy dog that lost his bone."

I however, do hope that the new legislation will bring to justice to those who are committing acts of fraud by way of scamming.

Melvin Pennant (MAP)

warriorsunleashed@gmail.com

Lotto victims are greedy too

-->

Dear Editor,

It was reported in the news on television yesterday (March 12) that representatives of the US media and Homeland Security came to Jamaica recently, to carry out investigations aimed at identifying the perpetrators of the lotto scam. They did so in the interest of protecting their citizens who have fallen prey to cruel lotto scams, some of which are alleged to originate from Jamaica. Could you imagine the Jamaican authorities arresting and imprisoning the US media representatives and the US Homeland Security agents who participated in this initiative, instead of the lotto scammers?

Well, there are five Cubans languishing in prison in the United States for taking similar action to protect their fellow citizens and foreign nationals. They carried out investigations among the Cuban terrorists in Miami to identify the individuals and groups responsible for plotting to kill Cuban officials and scheming to plant bombs on planes, in hotels and other public places in Cuba, threatening the lives of not only millions of Cubans but thousands of tourists and foreign students. The information uncovered was turned over to the US authorities. However, instead of arresting the terrorists, they arrested the men who risked their lives to carry out the investigation in order to protect their fellow citizens and other people on thir soil.

The injustice against the five Cubans is patently clear. President Obama needs to look into this matter and use his executive powers to free these men who have been wrongly imprisoned for nearly 15 years because of a flawed judicial process.

Jenny Wilson

wilson.jenny@gmail.com

Right for the US, wrong for Cuba?

-->

Dear Editor,

While I completely agree with East Portland MP Daryl Vaz's criticism of justice minister Mark Golding's misplaced priorities in flogging his obeah law through Parliament, Vaz misses the big picture. Not for the first time, the method in the madness of Mr Golding has flown right over his head. He just doesn't get it.

As Vaz correctly observes, desperate times call for desperate measures. Which is precisely why Mr Golding has moved with Bolt-like speed on this issue. Never mind important matters like scrapping the jury system entirely so that the justice system can breathe. That can wait forever. Our justice minister has obviously concluded that the situation is so desperate, it is now beyond prayer. So, just as the law has been amended to legalise the government's desperate raid of the NHT funds, so too the law has to b e amended to legalise the government's desperate access to the obeahman's always wise counsel. Especially on the Law of Trusts.

If there is one skill set that these desperate times will bequeath to Jamaica it is this: how to laugh and cry at the same time.

Errol WA Townshend

Scarborough, Ontario

Vaz just doesn't get it!

-->

Dear Editor,

With deep joy I offer Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio my warm congratulations and most fervent good wishes on his election to the papacy.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a man rich in spiritual passion, humility, self-denial and love for the cause of God and of man. As Pope Francis, he brings to the papacy a brilliant philosophical and, in particular, theological mind that has embraced a vision of broad spiritual and ecclesiastical horizons: personal holiness, missionary outreach combined with constant concern for unity, and the necessary integration of spirituality and institutional ministry.

His episcopal motto "Miserando atque eligendo" has strengthened and guided him in his tireless and uncompromising efforts aimed at defending and promoting the Catholic faith and its morals against modern errors in an age in which the Catholic Church has suffered unprecedented persecution and martyrdom.

The new pope has also worked to encourage studies aimed at increasing knowledge of the faith so that the new problems arising from the progress of science and civilisation can be answered in the light of the word of God.

The aim for which he has always strived has been to serve the truth, seek to know it ever more thoroughly and make it ever more widely known.

May the Lord lavish his choicest heavenly reward upon our new Vicar of Christ Francis 1.

Paul Kokoski

Ontario, Canada

Congrats to Pope Francis

-->

Dear Editor,

Many years ago through political patronage, the poor were provided houses which never became homes, but which have become garrisons and

impoverished and run-down areas where crime is rampant.

Middle class people obtained houses which became homes, much of this through the National Housing Trust. This organisation now has funds, and as such the Government will be using those funds to assist in paying its debts -- much of this arising out of our panache for things foreign; all of us poor, middle class and upper class. We all share in this problem of Government debt.

Going forward, how do we handle this debt situation of ours? The middle class still need houses, but the poor people, much more so, as is

evidenced by the level of squatting in the nation. A possible way out is for the NHT to buy from the Government, land and houses in the

garrison areas that are in disrepair and which through default many of them could become Government property. The NHT then could develop

policies and programmes to provide homes, not only for the middle class, but for the squatters, taking them from these squatting areas

and placing them on properly developed housing schemes. The garrison houses would be repaired, rented and/or sold.

There is one major thing that is the core of human and consequential national development -- the security of a home in which one has a vested interest, and which arises through ones contribution to the society. One gives, contributes, and one receives. This would be the core of the policies and programmes in the use of these resources by the NHT.

One contributes in such endeavours as farming, ICT and soon now in the logistics centre that our nation will be introducing in this part of the world. It is not through political patronage, as is evidenced in all of the top developed nations of the world. Political patronage creates the ground in which corruption and crime flourishes. Selling to the NHT is more decent and equitable than taking from it.

Ed Johnson

edward.r.johnson@gmail.com

Sell to the NHT instead

-->

Dear Editor,

While waiting for the early evening news on television, I happen to watch TVJ's Schools' Challenge Quiz which precedes the newscast. I am, however, disquieted by the jaundiced slant of the questions asked in the subject area "MUSIC". There seems to be a deliberate attempt to relegate our youngsters to the reggae-pop-dancehall ambit and limit their exposure to the world of Western Art Music, our own folk music, Jazz, and the marvellous music written for the stage and screen.

It seems apparent that the people responsible for compiling the questions have absolutely no cultivated musical tradition and are severely hampered by their exposure to the reggae/dancehall only, and have had no contact with the sophisticated genres of the symphony, the concerto, or the fugue of Western European Culture.

To consider it more important for our youth to know the release year of some dancehall albums, rather than knowing why Beethoven destroyed the title page of his Third Symphony, is absolutely absurd.

If the taste of the masses is to be the sole criterion when judging merit, we can expect to remain residual slaves in the dancehall for ever. May God help us!

We like to laud and magnify our "Music" as a great feature of Jamaican national pride, so I do hope that better care, thought, and breadth will be taken when planning policy in the future.

David Johns

djohns325@gmail.com

Bad choice of Schools' Challenge music questions

-->

Dear Editor,

Many Jamaicans must be mourning the recent passing of President Hugo Rafael Chavez of the Federal Republic of Venezuela, who had strong connections with Jamaica over the years.

President Chavez became very popular after he led a coup and attempted Government takeover in 1998. He eventually won the presidential election in 1999 and soon afterwards got voter approval for a new constitution.

Then, by 2000, Chavez was re-elected to a six-year term and while he had been a strong critic of the United States, he worked feverishly to hasten socialist reforms in Venezuela.

However, many wealthy and middle-class Venezuelans opposed Chavez because his Government increasingly took over decision-making for the petroleum industry and began redistributing wealth.

During his tenure, Chavez promoted his plan to create a "21st century socialism" and took steps to put important Venezuelan industries under public control.

Anyway, the Venezuelan Government has carried out massive programmes to improve the living conditions of the poor. For instance, the Government had provided building material, electricity, water, and sewage facilities for many local Rancho dwellers.

In addition, the Government had taken steps to improve rural life so that the people would stay on farms, instead of moving into crowded cities. At the same time, it must be emphasised that Venezuelans have a high standard of living in relation to the rest of Latin America, due mainly to the country's large petroleum production.

President Hugo Chavez, who was born on the 28th of July, 1954 in the State of Barines, Venezuela, was greatly influenced by the South American revolutionary, Simon Bolivar.

Certainly, Hugo Chavez was a courageous leader who made a great impact in Jamaica, the Caribbean, and to the marginalised people of his country. His legacy will live on.

Valentine Pearson

Montego Bay

valenem pearson@yahoo.com

Chavez's legacy will live on

-->

Dear Editor,

The election of Argentine Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio to the papacy is great news.

Bergoglio is a genuinely spiritual soul, and a man of deep prayer who tends to accent growth in personal holiness over efforts for structural reform.

An accomplished theologian, he is especially well known for his great personal humility. Despite his status as a Prince of the Church, he chose to live in a simple apartment rather than in the archbishop's palace. He also cooked his own meals and gave up his chauffeured limousine in favour of taking the bus to work.

Bergoglio is also a staunch defender of Catholic moral teaching. He has especially opposed the intrinsic immorality of divorce, homosexual practices, abortion, euthanasia, same-sex marriage, and contraception. In 2010, he was one of the first to propose that gay adoption is a form of discrimination against children. His doctrinal orthodoxy has always emphasised Christ's mandate to love. He is well remembered for his 2001 visit to a hospice, in which he washed and kissed the feet of 12 AIDS patients.

The new Vicar of Christ, Pope Francis, is a rare example of a humble intellectual. With him guiding the Barque of Peter, the horizon looks bright, not only for Catholics, but for all men of good faith.

Rick Arlen

Barbados

Pope pick is great news

-->