Jamaica Observer

Dear Editor,

As the society goes through various Child Month observances, we reflect on the joy that children bring and the excitement in contemplating what they could become.

By our laws, and in partnership with international conventions, Jamaica has made commitments to their survival, to their healthy growth and development. Therefore, as we celebrate children this May, let us also consider the children in our society who have been called 'uncontrollable'. Then, let's ask ourselves, what are the realities that might be at the root of their distressing behaviours?

Children who have been abused physically, sexually, emotionally, or who have been neglected, tend to be more aggressive than their peers. They have trouble forming and maintaining friendships, and they don't learn as they are expected to.

They may have serious problems with anger, states of panic, depression, and have thoughts about harming themselves, than children in the general population.

The brain has an important role to play in how we express our emotions. Decades of studies of the brains of children who have been abused, show changes in the size, shape and function of certain regions in the brain. When a child's brain has been altered by abuse, he/she can experience very great difficulty in controlling and expressing their emotions.

What we see and call uncontrollable behaviour is really a reflection of how, at the level of the unconscious, they have had to make adaptations in order to cope, and for which they don't have words.

Uncontrollable children are telling us something -- who is listening?

Rose Robinson-Hall

Assistant lecturer

Department of Community Health and Psychiatry

University of the West Indies, UWI

Mona

Spare a thought for so-called 'uncontrollable' children

-->

Dear Editor,

May 17 was observed as the International Day Against Homophobia. It is, therefore, an opportune time to register our objection to the word and more specifically to its current usage. A phobia is defined as an irrational fear, and in any other setting the word is assumed to carry that meaning.

Homophobia is used to describe any action, idea or statement that reflects a rejection or criticism of homosexuality or indeed anything that falls short of a positive affirmation of its associated behaviour.

The perverted use of the word is not due merely to an error in the use of English. Instead, this represents a strategy to label, intimidate and silence those who do not support or affirm homosexuality.

The owner of Chic-fil-A was labelled a "homophobic bigot" for his defence of heterosexual marriage. So what adjective would be used to describe the French homosexuals who objected to the recognition of gay "marriage"?

In 2012, the Lancet reported that men who have sex with men (MSMs) is the only group with increasing HIV prevalence rates in countries of all income levels, and that these rates are 100 times higher in black MSMs than in the general population.

Additionally, the journal AIDS Behaviour in 2011 reported that despite significant increases in rights, HIV prevalence is disproportionately high and increasing among MSMs in the United States.

Violence against homosexuals is not a phobia; it is criminal behaviour that should be punished under the law. Discouraging the homosexual lifestyle would seem to be a very rational thing. Indeed, to do otherwise would reflect an irrational fear of the homosexual political lobby.

Dr Wayne West

Chairman JCHS

Deliberate misuse of word homophobia

-->

Dear Editor,

Sometime ago, Lady Allen, the wife of Governor General Sir Patrick Allen, made utterances to the effect that her belief in Jamaica was severely shaken by the brutal murder of a one-time member of their security detail.

The good lady simply felt like "not wanting to be Jamaican anymore". She felt like migrating. Her comments came in for considerable condemnation from numerous quarters.

Today, news that the president of the Senate, Rev Stanley Redwood, is migrating dominates the media, and for quite understandable reasons, after all, he has gone one step further on Lady Allen's sentiments.

However, what should be discussed is not the possible or actual migration of public officials, but rather the migration of the remnants of dignity which remained in the Lower House since the revelation about the mandatory retirement of teachers past a ripe old age.

The scent of hypocrisy has once more emanated from that once honourable chamber. How can a government prescribe forced retirement for all public officials except themselves?

In an age where the development of countries depends on robust policies formulated, debated and enacted by their parliaments, Jamaica's fortunes remain encumbered by the unwillingness of parliamentarians to do unto themselves as they would do to others.

It's time that many of our 'leaders' actually lead from the front. One way to start is for MPs who are 65 years and older to retire, as they would have the rest of us to do.

Noel Matherson

noelmatherson@gmail.com

Scent of hypocrisy from Gordon house

-->

I was forwarded a local news story surrounding graduation controversy at Glenmuir High School, which even piqued Education Minister Thwaites' interest, although he vowed not to get involved. According to the report, Glenmuir has a strict graduation policy, forbidding students from graduating if they didn't pass maths and English in 5th form. I've honestly never read such rubbish in quite a while. The student at the centre of controversy was bright enough to sit and pass maths & English prior to reaching fifth form. The student, Leann Lewis — now in 4th form, has seven subjects, and passed English with grade one at age 12.

In my view, it is an outstanding achievement, which ought to be highly commended! Having said that, the principal is being stubborn enough to want to enforce a strange graduation policy, which obviously wasn't worded properly in the first place, and which implies that the student may be barred from graduation the following year. We all know maths & English are vital subjects, required in just about every area, but perhaps the policy should be worded to forbid graduation if students didn't sit these subjects at all, regardless of pass or fail, and moreso, regardless of when they sat it! According to the report, "The principal, Monacia Williams, says the school is not instructing that Leann should re-sit maths and English when she reaches fifth form, it is only insisting that she must abide by the graduation policy."

I should advise the prinicipal that a policy is merely a rule or code of conduct. It is not a law; the student didn't do anything illegal. This should not be an issue to be put before any Board for a decision either. I believe the Minister of Education should intervene immediately instead of staying silent, because this is actually quite confusing. What message are we really sending here to these young students?

P.Chin

chin_p@yahoo.com

Celebrate brightness, not darkness!

-->

Dear Editor,

It is reported in another newspaper (The Star) that the Spanish Town police yesterday seized an Escalade Sports Utility Vehicle that was transporting a body to a funeral after documentation proved it should not be operating on the road.

It is disturbing to me that members of the funeral party — or anyone for that matter — would be irate with the police. The police are not the ones who showed disrespect for the dead. The funeral director/parlor showed disrespect for the dead and the rule of law when they did not have the proper documentation for the vehicle.

I hope the police file charges against the driver. The Transport Authority and the NRSC should be working to have government enact legislation that will ensure stiff penalties for driving unlicensed and

uninsured vehicles.

Authnel Reid

authnelreid@optonline.net

Disrespecting the dead

-->

I hope it's not too late for me to zero in, endorse and congratulate Mr Norman Edmonson for writing such a very important article, titled: "Corporal punishment is not abuse", which was published in the Jamaica Observer on Tuesday, December 11, 2012.

He raised some vital points concerning the classroom. He said:

"I am flabbergasted that the Ministry of Education would even have considered ending corporal punishment, especially in a nation that has a crime epidemic." He went on to ask: "Do we not know that the removal of corporal punishment is a significant contributor to the increase in criminal activity across the country?"

Well said, Mr Edmonson.

What does this quotation from the Bible — "Don't spare the rod and spoil the child"— mean to you? Some people say that using the whip is not the right policy in disciplining or punishing unruly children.

However, in my opinion, one of the quickest and surest ways to get their attention when they are misbehaving is to unleash the rod of correction, which is the hottest and most bitter part of the scourging.

On the other hand, it seems to me that the days of corporal punishment are over. In days gone by, it was rampant in most, if not all schools. And it really worked in helping to ease the pressure and burden of the teachers.

And, during those days, when teachers used the belt to discipline ill-mannered or presumptuous 'schoolers', they very seldom retaliated, as the current students now do.

Furthermore, I believe that one of the reasons why corporal punishment is being removed from the classroom is because of fear — fear of being attacked, fear of threats and tongue-lashings from students and their parents. Teachers are up against a new age of trepidation and intimidation — which is a daily menu in the classroom because of the different classes and attitudes of these modern-day pupils.

So, then, with the removal from the classroom of corporal punishment, the most vital remedy, which can and will bring defiant, aggressive and violent students to submission, the question is: Where do we go from here?

I think that the government should do all it can to bring back corporal punishment to the classroom.

DONALD J MCKOY

Email: donaldmckoy2010@yahoo.com

The Editor,

Kindly allow me to send an open letter to Ms Kelly Tomblin, President of the Jamaica Public Sevice Company (JPS).

Ms Tomblin, I observed the great effort you and your team have been pursuing in creating a new image for the JPS. Since you have taken over the light and power company, there has been a sincere effort to engage all stakeholders in buying into your vision for the company.

I am, however, uncomfortable with one of your recent proposals to our main utility regulator, the Office Of Utility Regulation. My concern stems from the proposed fee that will be charged to customers' accounts for late payment of their bill.

I do not have a problem with the principle of charging a fee in itself, because outstanding payment represents an extended credit without the element of the price of money (interest).

My concern is that if this is implemented in its present form, it will run the risk of creating unnecessary delinquent accounts and may be seen as a tax on the use of electricity.

The reason for this is that the JPS presently operates on a billing cycle system. What this means is that the due date of most customers' bills will fluctuate by a day or two each month. Also, over a one-year period, a customer's due date may be brought forward as the cycle changes. This practice, if not carefully managed by customers, may lead to their account falling in arrears, and to them appearing delinquent.

I suggest you consider having a fixed date nearing the end of each month, for all your customers. There are many benefits to such an approach -- it will greatly improve the customer logistics in terms of meter reading, printing and issuing of bills. For customers, this would greatly assist in respect to conveniences, especially as it relates to public servants.

This approach is nothing new; a version of it is presently being used by one of our major cable providers. More importantly, this approach will enhance your quest in further improving your company's image, and it will prevent genuine customers being labelled delinquent, which may have negative consequences for their future credit rating.

mm2clarke @yahoo.com

Greater Portmore

St Catherine.

Dear Editor,

The Love March Movement applauds the stance that Reverend Ronald Thwaites has taken against the distribution of condoms in high schools.

As adolescents, we believe that facilitating sexual activity among high school children simply because it is expected to take place is, at best complacent, and reckless, and at worst, incoherent, and morally and legally complicit.

First, distributing condoms on the premise that students will have sex anyway is synonymous with buying more bandages on the premise that students will fight anyway. Extramarital, underage sexual activity, like fighting, is a socially negative behaviour for a school environment.

The response should be to guide students to healthier, safer behaviours such as abstinence, self-control and discipline. It is self-defeating to merely treat the symptoms of the problems.

Second, the dangers of sexual activity, particularly among youth, cannot be fully mitigated with condoms. In terms of protecting physical health, the use of condoms falls short, very short.

They do not protect against certain STDs, such as herpes, syphilis and HPV. They are not 100 per cent effective, with fail rates estimated as high as 11 per cent. Furthermore, there is always the risk that students will not use them properly, or not use them every time they have sex, even though the occasional use of condoms gives them the illusion of safety.

Sexual activity also affects a person psychologically. Sex releases hormones that bond individuals to each other (oxytocin in girls, vasopressin in boys). Therefore, school-aged children who have sex — even with a condom — get powerfully attached to partners, which results in psychological trauma once a change in relationship occurs.

Dopamine (which creates a feeling of euphoria after sex or any thrilling activity) makes these students become addicted to sex. Furthermore, by telling children to simply wear a condom, as opposed to limiting the number of partners they have, will eventually weaken their neurological ability to bond to a sexual partner such as a husband or wife in the future.

Minister Ronald Thwaites, keep up the good work.

The Love March Movement

lovemarch2012jam@gmail.com

Education Minister Ronald Thwaites

Well said, Minister Thwaites

-->

Dear Editor,

I write in response to a letter to you from one Kemar Brown published on May 15 under the headline 'Why block police youth club members from joining the constabulary?'.

Mr Brown alleges in his letter that police youth club members are not being given the opportunity to become police officers. This is absolutely not true. There are many former police youth club members who are now serving members of the police force and doing extremely well.

The doors of the JCF and auxiliaries are always open to qualified police youth club members who wish to make the police service a career.

Alluding to a private conversation he recently had with a senior police official, Mr Brown states that he "found it rather ridiculous and insensitive of a certain senior police official, saying in a private discussion that he would rather look outside of the police youth club to fill the gaps of the constabulary".

I can state for the record that on Friday, May 10, 2013, I attended the Area 4 Police Athletic meet at the Police Elletson Road Sports Complex where a young man who identified himself as a police youth club member approached me and suggested that the police force should give preferential access to police youth club members wishing to enlist.

I recall telling the young man that we have a recruitment policy which is based on merit and is not discriminatory. I told him that if the JCF were to act on his proposal, it would deliberately deny itself the talents of applicants who are not PYC members but may be more qualified than some police youth club members.

So while I recall the young man saying he was surprised at my response, to report that I said I would rather look outside of the police youth club to fill the gaps in the force is a deliberate falsehood and most unbecoming of one wishing to make law enforcement a career.

The Jamaica Constabulary Force values the police youth club movement. In my time as commissioner of police I have mandated police commanders to significantly expand police youth club membership.

In a short period of three years we have increased membership by over 9,000 persons. We continue to look to the police youth club movement for talents for the police service, and we would encourage police youth club members with an interest in law enforcement as a career, to apply for enlistment.

We cannot and will not lower our standards for any person, whether they be police youth club members or otherwise.

Owen Ellington, CD, JP

Commissioner of Police

Owen Ellington

The JCF has basic entry requirements

-->

Dear Editor,

I respond to the article headlined 'Belize case said being used to push gay agenda in Caribbean' of Sunday, May 19, 2013 in the Jamaica Observer.

I am one of the lawyers who appeared in this case — on behalf of the applicant — Caleb Orozco. Accordingly, I anticipate that, in fairness, you will publish this reply.

In September of 2010, Caleb Orozco filed a constitutional challenge of Section 53 of the Criminal Code of Belize as being contrary to and in contravention of his fundamental rights and freedoms as contained in the Constitution of Belize.

Orozco is seeking a review of the law on the basis that his rights are — and are likely to be — violated by this section of the Code.

To contend that the Orozco v AG case is "part of a larger effort by the homosexual lobby to get buggery laws repealed in the Caribbean and push that lifestyle on the public" is to pretend, ignore, and effectively deny that Mr Orozco has these rights at all; and worse, to relegate his challenge to the law as mere assertion of some mythical "agenda".

Nothing could be further from the truth. Not only has the State not challenged Mr Orozco's locus standi on that basis, but the only parties who say so baldly, without any proof thereof, are the Churches' interested parties in Belize and, of course, Ms Shirley Richards and Dr Wayne West.

The Jamaican Coalition for Healthy Living is not a party to the Belizean case at all, unless they wish to now disclose their participation in the matter, so that their own agenda may be revealed.

It is most interesting, however, to learn that "... West and his coalition are not sitting still while the court deliberates".

Instead of "warning" the Caribbean, "including Jamaicans, to be aware of the terrible consequences that a repeal of the buggery law will bring about", Ms Shirley and Dr West should seek instead to work with UNIBAM (United Belize Advocacy Movement) and other groups to reform our outdated, colonial and ineffective sexual offences legislation in order to properly defend and protect the children of the Caribbean as well as our women and men. I submit that that should be the "grave concern" of these worthies.

Never swallow the line that if you are not a criminal you do not have to worry about a law. Section 53 of the Criminal Code of Belize directly impacts real persons, Belizeans and visitors alike, rendering them liable to imprisonment for 10 years.

The State confirmed in its submissions to the court that it applies equally to heterosexuals and to other forms of sex. There should, by all means be "...a deliberate action to get these laws repealed in the Caribbean...".

The stated fear that "punishment that will be meted out to persons who speak out against homosexuality if the law is repealed" is nothing more than the 'Chicken Little' cry of the sky falling. It is absolutely and categorically untrue that anyone is asking for any "punitive rights".

No one is being asked to give up freedom of conscience, expression, religion or speech. But we are asking that human dignity be upheld.

More human rights for the LGBT citizens will not mean less rights for those persons of faith. It will simply mean more human rights for more Caribbean persons. Resist the fear-mongering cries of a coming Caribbean Sodom and Gomorrah.

We are a wise people, a strong people who defeated slavery and survived. We will survive this too. We will decide for us, with the help of our courts and our legislature, what is the right path for us. We have never been nations of sheeple.

I have faith in the families of thousands of Caribbean LGBT people that they want their loved ones to suffer no more discrimination simply because they are not heterosexual. They do have human rights, Reverend Garth. Let us ensure that they get them.

Lisa M Shoman, SC

Attorney-at-law for Caleb Orozco and UNIBAM

lmshoman@hotmail.com

Caleb Orozco

Resist the fear-mongering cries of a coming Caribbean Sodom and Gomorrah

-->

Dear Editor,

The wisdom of the ancients suggests that an ounce of prevention is always better than a pound of cure. As I assess certain recent pronouncements of the minister of education regarding condoms in schools, teenage pregnancy, and the proposed support of school-age mothers in the care of their children, I think I'm seeing a bit of an absence of the conventional wisdom being applied.

Let me categorically say that I in many ways admire and do often find the minister to be balanced, logical, and generally agreeable. What has me puzzled about his statements is that whatever it is that informed his stance to not distribute condoms in schools seems totally derailed by his proposition to financially support school-age mothers who are not able to adequately provide for the care of their young children. That's of course assuming that he is advocating abstinence as the undisputedly 100% effective contraception to reduce the incidence of pregnancy among schoolgirls. There may also be the moral platform on which this position is staged; to issue condoms may be seen as endorsement of premarital sexual intercourse. Incidentally, to offer support after the fact may equally be seen as an invitation. It may even have a stronger pull factor - an unplanned-for child will be taken care of by the government.

It seems to me that the post-natal support would also be a much more expensive undertaking than to make condoms available. I must ask if the ministry is not interested in the reduction of schoolgirl pregnancy. And if so, wouldn't condoms be a much more cost-effective means? After all, pre-pregnancy intervention (condoms) and post-natal support (proposed government financial aid) will both provide similar incentives for sexual engagement in schools. So it raises the question, is the ministry's problem with contraception, period? That would be a bit of a luxury especially for a government that has to be limiting benefits customarily accorded to teachers.

I believe the minister's statements on the prospects of gay marriage being eventually approved (from a government's position) clearly articulates that he understands that positions sometimes taken by governments don't necessarily reflect the moral posture of the government on the issue itself, but only reflect an appreciation of human rights, equity, economic imperatives. It comes down to how the government defines the individual in terms of rights, responsibilities and privileges. Within this realm of Government acting independently of individual members' personal values should be the consideration of the most feasible way of treating with the situation of schoolgirl pregnancy. Being substantively informed by the minister's presentation, here's a priority listing of what I believe should happen:

A. Yes, there should be an ideal sex education programme in our schools that among other things should discourage such inappropriate activities as would result in untimely pregnancies.

B. Where "A" fails to convince students not to engage, then it would make sense to help them to be safe. Make the condoms available.

C. If "A & B" fail, of course these girls should be kept in school, and yes, reasonable financial support should be offered where it is established that the fathers are not able to provide for the newborn. Hopefully the incidence of coming to this stage will be few and far between.

There are laws/rules/policies that protect an individual's right to make certain choices. These laws/rules/policies don't require specific actions; they simply leave some choices to the individual's discretion. All this comes down to the definition of who an individual is as subscribed to by a government. The case for condoms in schools respects the right of the individual to protections afforded by their use. The case for Government being the agent to distribute is that it would otherwise have to pay for its non-use.

Charles Evans

charock01@yahoo.com

The wisdom of condoms in schools

-->

Dear Editor,

I am in total support of the graduation policy of the Glenmuir High School, namely that persons who do not pass mathematics and English language at the fifth form should not be allowed to graduate. It is policies such as these that have kept the school at the forefront of academic excellence in this country.

For far too long the education system has been a conveyor belt for graduating dunces and illiterates. The pomp and pageantry of many graduation ceremonies is a waste of taxpayers' and parents' money. I really do not see the point of the recent controversy. Logically the person or persons who implemented such a policy could not have intended that persons who pass these subjects before they reach the fifth-form level could not themselves graduate. Any other interpretation would produce an iniquitous result and could not have been the intention of the framers of the policy.

The policy itself can only be regarded as a minimum standard, as the attainment of the standard before the fifth form year is in excess of this minimum. Students who exceed the standard should not therefore be prejudiced by not being allowed to graduate. Surely the achievement of Miss Leann Lewis should be lauded by the school and she should be given pride of place and special prizes at any future graduation ceremony. Surely her present status is now at a level that she needs not do any other subject in order to graduate.

I am saddened that the school and its administration could not interpret the fact in this way. To act in any other way is to add to the crisis of good governance and transformational leadership that has led us to become international mendicants and has condemned the large pool of graduating dunces and illiterates to lives of persistent poverty and underdevelopment.

Hugh Anthony Porter

bungohead@hotmail.com

Consider Glenmuir policy a minimum standard

-->

Dear Editor,

I would be remiss if I did not respond to your newspaper editorial on Wednesday May 15, 2013, "Ever heard of Dr Don Shirley, another great but forgotten Jamaican?" It concluded, "In the future, let us honour our Jamaican greats before they pass on as did Dr Don Shirley, hailed abroad, but with no accolade from the land of his birth".

Yes, many of us have not only heard of Dr Don Shirley, but have not waited for his death to celebrate his accomplishments.

As the host of two radio programmes, I have played Shirley's music quite a bit and on occasions have used the programme to elaborate on his creative and academic achievement. The genius of this Jamaican has been part of the curriculum as long as I have had the opportunity to teach courses about our culture.

You must have missed a release in the May 25, 2012 edition of the Gleaner that headlined: "Music Unites" and which stated: "Jamaica Foundation presents a multicultural chamber music concert in honour of Dr Don Shirley, internationally acclaimed Jamaican composer and pianist". The concert was held at the UWI Chapel, Mona Campus, on Saturday, June 2 last year at 8:00 pm. In addition to the tribute to the much overlooked Don Shirley by noted musicologist Herbie Miller, this concert was also the launch of the new Cultural Friendship Society 'Out of Many One Music. Although I was unable to attend, the concert was held and reviewed on Monday June 4, in that same paper.

Following my recommendation, Dr Shirley was awarded a Bronze Musgrave medal by the Institute of Jamaica in October 2012. On that occasion, under the heading "14 to receive Musgrave medals today" your newspaper, the Observer, on October 10, 2012 noted that Dr Donald Shirley would be honoured "for merit in the field of music".

In recent times the Gleaner has twice published pieces on Dr Shirley that I have written — "Dr Don Shirley, a musician beyond category" was published on July 25, 2012 and Dr Shirley, "A Virtuoso dies too quietly", was published on Monday May 6, 2013. In addition, Dermot Hussey has played Shirley's music and praised his accomplishments for as long as he has been presenting elegant music on his various radio programmes over the years.

Perhaps it is your editorial writer who, since his death, has just caught up with Dr Donald Shirley. However, I personally do share the view that "we should consider erecting a statue to those Jamaicans whose heroic accomplishments are largely unknown and unrecognised by the vast majority of Jamaicans".

To that end, while the Jamaica Music Museum at the Institute of Jamaica is not in the business of erecting statues or broadening our purview beyond music and musicians and their relationship to nation building (other divisions in the Institute of Jamaica cover that), our mandate is to collect, preserve and disseminate artefacts and information about our musicians, including overlooked but internationally acclaimed ones such as Dr Don Shirley. Others like Dr Leslie Thompson, Dizzy Reece, Oswald Russell, Yorke DeSouza, Mercedes Kirkwood, Sonny Gray and Joe Harriott among many others, have also not been overlooked by us.

The achievements of many "heroic but forgotten" Jamaicans, in and outside of music have been recognised with gold, silver and bronze Musgrave medals by the Institute of Jamaica. We hope to continue our public education of these and the honouring of others in keeping with not only our mandate, but also our personal respect and admiration of these and other outstanding Jamaicans.

Herbie Miller

Director/Curator

Jamaica Music Museum

Institute of Jamaica

Yes, many of us have heard of Dr Don Shirley

-->

Dear Editor,

I recently came across an article in the other Jamaican publication entitled "Leave 'em out" where members of the Jamaica Energy Council (JEC) were advocating excluding the post-closure arriving proposal from Hong Kong-based Energy World Corporation (EWC) from consideration. Admittedly, the dissenting voices included Opposition spokesman on energy Gregory Mair and Jamaica Manufacturers' President Brian Pengelley, but the gravity of the matter dictates that we weigh this matter carefully.

I find it disturbing that folks are of such a strong view that we should just go with the cheapest solution, which the EWC appears to be. Does it not matter that EWC has not yet declared the size of the plant that they plan to build, nor its location?

I find it disturbing that folks are of such a strong view that we should just go with the cheapest solution, which the EWC appears to be. Does it not matter that EWC has not yet declared the size of the plant that they plan to build, nor its location?

Aside from the lack of principle involved, there is a deep underlying problem manifested here where folks believe a company that shows up at the ninth hour and says 'we can provide financing, plus we have gas fields', but the details, including project size and location will come later, should be parachuted to the front of the line based solely on pricing.

Truth is, EWC having even one oil field is irrelevant. We live in a capitalist, non-altruistic world and EWC will not forego $15/MMBtu for natural gas in Asia — their backyard — for $6/MMBtu in the Caribbean ($4/MMBtu in the US). Even after transportation and logistics costs, the arbitrage premium is immense, which is why the big guys are liquefying and transporting the vast majority of their production (LNG) to Asia. Heck, you get $10/MMBtu in Europe.

Bottom line is this -- there is no free lunch. That's the mindset that got us the pyramid-schemes in the first place. Let's sit up and objectively assess opportunities, then make fundamentally sound decisions. That's the only thing that's going to get this thing turned around and headed in the right direction.

By the way, Jamaica Public Service was the sole tender to the prior request for proposals. They are tripping financial metrics related to their current debts left, right and centre. They cannot afford to self-build or cost-effectively obtain financing for plant construction. If the CEO is telling us to go with someone else, it's for obvious reasons — the world is not altruistic!

Carl A Williams

Cheapest energy solution isn't necessarily best

-->

Dear Editor,

Many of our historians continue to advance very funny and strange arguments in their quest to have Britain and other European powers pay slavery reparations. One of the most hilarious beckons of these historians is the comparison between the Jewish Holocaust and African slavery.

According to this beckon, the Europeans should pay up their "black" debt to us Africans, just as the Germans paid the Jews theirs. However, those of us who understand history will know that this is an apple and egg comparison.

As bad as Hitler may have been, he did not start anti-Semitism. Long before him, Jews were seen by many Europeans as less than human. However, while discrimination against Jews was accepted by many, the extermination of Jews was a very different matter.

Hitler was no fool. He knew that his final solution would not be accepted by Germans. That was why he established his extermination facilities in remote areas, which were unknown to most Germans. Talk of Jewish death camps were dismissed by the Nazis as British propaganda designed to discredit the German government.

Indeed, after the war, when the full details of what the Nazis were doing to the Jews came to light, most Germans were shocked.

This was nothing like African slavery. Africans were openly bought by the Europeans and sold by the Africans in arrangements that were not only legal, but acceptable to both sides. No one was shocked at slavery.

The point being made here is that reparations for Jews were justified because, irrespective of what the rest of the world thought, the German people, for the most part, were ashamed of what happened. How can any reparations for us blacks be justified if our own people were freely selling us out, without any shame?

I would urge those historians who continue to make hilarious beckons to take some time to fully understand what they are calling for. Right now, they are not making much sense.

Michael A Dingwall.

Kingston

michael_a_dingwall@hotmail.com

The hilarious beckons of historians

-->

Dear Editor,

The agreement for the age of consent should be at 18 or 19, instead of 16.

Not making this change is a big mistake, a national blunder in the face of rampant, wild and illicit sexual activity among the youth. You did not need wise King Solomon to tell you that you have made a grave and terrible mistake.

Despite the fact that many teenagers are on a passionate and rampage pursuit to exercise their love zone to feel like men and women — before the time — they should not be facilitated by a loose law.

To combat the "fall from grace" we must remember this little token: "Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it." There is a standard in this little token, in being on good footing, in becoming good, responsible citizens. The disciplined teenagers who are coming from good homes will not go with the flow, or fall prey to the age of consent. They will object against it and will not be pressured into having sex at such an early age.

One must ask the nail-biting questions: Who gave the authority for the age of consent to be at 16? Is it the State or the ruling bodies? What really prompted them to make such a silly mistake, or such an unwise decision?

At 16, a young girl is still in a juvenile mindset and is not yet fully mature. She is incapable of being a good mother to a child, especially if there is no one to guide her.

The age of consent does not only mean the go-ahead to engage in sex, it also implies being able to handle responsibility, etc, and mishaps will follow: unwanted pregnancy, etc.

Allowing teenagers to indulge in sexual intercourse at 16, when there are so many fatherless children, and irresponsible men can backfire, which can result in a serious clamour for counselling and guidance. Sixteen-year-olds should be preparing themselves and their minds to get to the next level by pursuing academic skills and developing maturity.

Giving liberty to becoming sexually active at 16 can contradict moral conducts and principles. For example, from a religious standpoint, you say, "OK, girls, you are free to make love at 16, but be careful and use protection", and you did not say to them: get married first the low age limit is a push for a fornication spree. At this early age of consent, there maybe a multiplication of unwanted pregnancies and a possible hike in the abortion rate to cover up mistakes.

According to how I see things, the most appropriate time to get involved in a sexual relationship, and start thinking about marriage and raising a family, is when you are in your 20s, 30s and up.

Donald J Mckoy

donaldmckoy2010@hotmail.com

16 means fornication spree

-->

Dear Editor,

It was with a great sense of disappointment that I read a letter by Bentley King under the headline 'Normal school not for teen baby mothers'. What was disappointing about it was that the author seemed to have wholeheartedly condemned every single teen who got pregnant. I wondered to myself, has he never made any error during his teenage years?

All of us, at that stage in our lives, were prone to making bad choices. Do we expect those bad choices to be used to determine our future?.

My sister got pregnant while she was in high school and had to leave the school. But for the good work of places like the Women's Centre, she was able to get her education back on track.

The writer asked whether the Jamaica Teachers' Association (JTA) endorsed this proposed policy. Let me remind him that the JTA does not have responsibility for policies coming out of the ministry, and in this case the minister has the ultimate responsibility to make such a change.

I must say kudos as well to Opposition Senator Kamina Johnson-Smith for moving the motion in the Senate and to the minister for taking it on in a white paper. This is progress.

Of course, this will not fix the problem of teenage pregnancy, but it will give these persons a second chance at their education.

To say that this proposal gives teenage girls a licence to go out and become pregnant while in school is a fallacy and must be treated as such.

Ralston Chamberlain

Toronto, Ontario

Let the children play together

-->

Dear Editor,

Mankind is soon to be struck from the planet (Zachariah 13:8; Zephaniah 1 and 2). The pole shift and devastated dry planet of Isaiah 24-27 would explain this along with unprecedented tsunamis (Lk 21:25), very strong winds and skies receeding like a scroll.

The final seven years (Daniel 9) began with a phenomenal disaster in the only city on earth bearing his name (Jeremiah 25:29). With a PGA of 2.2g (Wikipedia), the Christchurch earthquake of February 2011 registered the greatest shaking in the vertical dimension ever recorded for an earthquake near a city. For comparison, Haiti's earthquake registered 0.5g.

The final generation (Mt 24:34) of 70 years began with Israel's reinstatement of May 1948. The anointed one returns 49 years after the order to rebuild Jerusalem (Dan. 9:25). A rebuild order after the six-day war of 1967 had been issued on April 1, 1969, 49 years before Easter Sunday, 2018. God is to return during 2018 and maybe sooner.

You can survive the end times (Zachariah 3:2), and more important, receive eternal life. The decision for everyone to make is: Will they ask God for his free gift of unconditional forgiveness and salvation, thereby making Jesus Lord of their life?

Boyd Cassie

cassiebg@ihug.co.nz

The end of time

-->

Dear Editor,

I felt compelled to express my disapproval and discontent at the exclusion of Jermaine "Tuffy" Anderson from the Reggae Boyz squad that has been assembled for a training camp in The Bahamas ahead of the three crucial "make or break" World Cup qualifiers in June. His hard work and remarkable achievements throughout the just-concluded Red Stripe National Premier League season should have merited the "no-nonsense goalscorer" at least a place on the bench in the 26-man squad.

I am now left in a state of shock and bewilderment, as either the authorities are suffering from myopia or have completely turned a blind eye, yet again, to a player who has been knocking, and in some cases beating on the door for quite some time. Is there any merit in the adage, "who the cap fit, let them wear it"? I am beginning to think twice.

For a schoolboy, other local-based and foreign-based players from lower division clubs — with all due respect to these players — to be selected with no mention made of Tuffy, has to be demoralising, to say the least; and for me, I find it unacceptable given what he has accomplished. I empathise with him and hope that good sense will prevail.

I understand that the Jamaica Football Federation has an open-door policy as it relates to players, but insofar as Tuffy is concerned, it appears as if this door has been locked and the key thrown away. There is no doubt that he has provided the league with excitement and flair with his flamboyant style of play and his innate ability to score goals, much like Walter Boyd and Onandi Lowe in previous years. Now tell me, if the league's top marksman for the last two consecutive seasons and awardee of the 2012/2013: (a) Player of the Season, (b) Tony Burrowes Award, (c) Top goalscorer for Round 3 and (d) Top goalscorer for the season cannot claim a spot in the squad, then what else must he do?

The 34-year-old has long expressed his willingness to represent Jamaica again and is waiting with bated breath for such an opportunity. I don't envisage he is the answer to our goalscoring woes, but he certainly can do no worse than those who are currently in the team. In fact, he has demonstrated the determination, enthusiasm and commitment in becoming successful. I do believe he can add the value and punch up front that has been lacking in all the games thus far.

On the other hand, I respect the right of the coaching staff to assemble those whom they perceive to be the best available players at this particular point in time. However, it is my belief that Mr Anderson should be given a chance or an extended look-in for him to make a meaningful contribution to the national football programme.

Andre R. Smith

ceoandre@aol.com

'Tuffy' Anderson deserves a chance

-->

Dear Editor,

The migration of the Reverend Stanley Redwood, former president of the Senate, along with his family, once again brings into sharp focus the question of leadership. Mr. Redwood seemingly agreed with Vision 2030 to make Jamaica a place to live, work, raise family and do business, but just not for his family or himself.

Leadership in its strictest sense can be defined as the art of inducing subordinates to accomplish their assignments with zeal and confidence. A leader inspires people to follow him/her willingly even with little immediate reward.

Michael Manley was a leader with that rare quality called charisma, he could charm milk out of coffee, but he wasn't a manager and Jamaica suffered severe economic downturn because of that, we lost 25% of GDP. Manley was able to inspire us to put work into Labour Day, to voluntarily assist those who couldn't read or write through JAMAL, along with a raft of social changes.

Edward Seaga, on the other hand, was a manager, not a leader; Jamaica has been unable to produce a leader/manager throughout its history. Seaga showed exceptional management skills when the country suffered the devastation of Hurricane Gilbert. He had to restore confidence in the economy after Manley's polices created havoc and fear. By the end of the 1980s the Jamaican economy was back on track and the growth continued into the early 1990s.

Edward Seaga, on the other hand, was a manager, not a leader; Jamaica has been unable to produce a leader/manager throughout its history. Seaga showed exceptional management skills when the country suffered the devastation of Hurricane Gilbert. He had to restore confidence in the economy after Manley's polices created havoc and fear. By the end of the 1980s the Jamaican economy was back on track and the growth continued into the early 1990s.

PJ Patterson was a leader, Patterson's reign was defined by corruption and a laissez faire attitude. It was a free-for-all, anything goes, you can do as you please style. He made excuses for everything and everyone. By the time the Trafigura scandal came along, preceeded by so many other scandals, Jamaicans were sick and tired of the Patterson People's National Party.

Bruce Golding was a manager, but like Manley and the Middle East oil crisis, he encountered the world's worst recession since the 1930s. This however didn't lead to his downfall, the Jamaica Labour Party could have weathered the storm, but Golding had surprisingly accepted leadership of Tivoli Gardens, described as the mother of all garrisons. Initially he steared clear of the Christopher "Dudus" Coke extradition request, but he eventually succumbed to the lure of defending a JLP benefactor.

Mrs Simpson Miller is a leader. Portia can make people vote for her by promising them oxtail and curried goat and still deliver to them chicken back, without a single murmur. Her policies will no doubt wreck the National Housing Trust, there will be no review of the buggery act, the poor will end up poorer by the time she decides to relinquish power and the Jamaican economy will be in tatters. But the majority of Jamaicans would still vote for her.

We all need to look at the people we give power, whether they be heads of school boards, managers of businesses, councillors, mayors, pastors, heads of community organisations, hospital administrators, senators, parliamentarians or other professionals or none professionals. We have to decide if we want a leader, manager or a leader who can also manage. Jamaica will never be better unless she is able to somehow obtain a leader/manager.

We use the terms managers and leaders interchangeably, but there are significant differences. Among the rare qualities of managers, the ability to lead is highly prized.

Mark Clarke

Siloah PO, St Elizabeth

Jamaica needs a leader who can manage

-->

Spare a thought for so-called 'uncontrollable' children

Deliberate misuse of word homophobia

Scent of hypocrisy from Gordon house

Celebrate brightness, not darkness!

Disrespecting the dead

Bring back corporal punishment in schools

JPS' late payment fee cause for concern

Well said, Minister Thwaites

The JCF has basic entry requirements

Resist the fear-mongering cries of a coming Caribbean Sodom and Gomorrah

The wisdom of condoms in schools

Consider Glenmuir policy a minimum standard

Yes, many of us have heard of Dr Don Shirley

Cheapest energy solution isn't necessarily best

The hilarious beckons of historians

16 means fornication spree

Let the children play together

The end of time

'Tuffy' Anderson deserves a chance

Jamaica needs a leader who can also manage