The guiding issue

I refer to the trio's contribuiton on the guiding issue, namely Mrs Leenhouts's "Guides, the law and law breakers," Mrs Camilleri Van Ek's "Guides and ignorance", and Mrs Tomasuolo's reply "Legal guiding".

The guiding chorus failed to rebuff my arguments, misunderstood my message and went on to prove how little they know about running a language school in all its different aspects.

As expected, they took the contents of my contribution as a personal offence. I never criticised their quality guiding. I simply stated well-known facts.

Do they or don't they charge from Lm25 to Lm28 for a full day for their guiding services? Your readers should know that I am quoting these figures from my audited receipts.

Mrs Leenhouts, in soliciting readers to review my letter, portrays me as being a victim in order to continue my illegal activities. Whose victim do I happen to be?

There is no case of falling as anybody's victim in running a language school. In order to justify her legal position, Mrs Leenhouts openly confessed:

"No matter how bad my guiding may be, or how much I overcharge or how terrible my English is..." People with such an attitude should not be guiding at all. This attitude is not acceptable by any means.

We do not claim the right to break the law, but we equally claim the adequate protection of the law to run our business according to European demands.

In trying to put records straight, Mrs Leenhouts worked out a mathematical equation based on abstract figures and applied its conclusion to all English language schools. Our aim is not to ignore licensed guides, but to moderate how much they should charge and that they should have the proper qualifications in English in guiding our students.

In her contribuiton "Guides and ignorance" (October 31), Mrs Nynke Camilleri Van Ek posed as a self-appointed and self-proclaimed judge in passing judgment on Ranier Fsadni, D. Caruana Galizia and, last but not least, on myself.

Her reasoning is most arrogant and insulting. She accused me of blatant ignornace on most imaginary points stored in the remote parts of her brain. May she be informed that I have been in this line of business long before her eyes caught the first glimpse of daylight.

It appears that my so-called ignorance has become her bliss! In joining the chorus, Ms Nadine Tomasuolo explained her missionary bid to bring the lost sheep to the right path. When she got a taste of her own medicine, Ms Tomasuolo found out that my reply was quite confusing, contradictory and distorted.

She failed to understand that her sweeping statements could trigger off anybody whose interests are closely linked with the subject. Why did she have to attack language schools in approaching the issue?

In her reply, Ms Tomasuolo stated that I have been organising cultural tours for years on end. To add insult to injury, she even stated that these tours were organised without engaging the services of a government-licensed guide.

Readers should know that there are many ways how one can organise these tours while at the same time stay within the framework of the law.

Instead of denying my figures, Ms Tomasuolo suggested to me to give up my present activities and to take up guiding as a full-time profession. I do not envy how much she may charge for her services.

My profession is not to make more money. I carry the weight of the administration of a language school. The only weight she carries is that of a guiding stick or an umbrella, for that matter. Our satisfaction is to provide income to hundreds of host families and to service providers. She and those like her do not provide anything to the economy of our country. They only live on other people's enterprises.

Finally, may I add that the truth hurts, but it does not hurt those who choose to express their opinion in a non-aggressive and in a positive way.

Our intention is to safeguard all our common interests, including those of licensed guides. Their livelihood is also our concern.