What About The Cheque Prime Minister David Thompson?

The dust is starting to settle 10 days after a fiercely contested general election. The new Prime Minister David Thompson has named his Kellmanless cabinet, and the country now awaits the performance of the newly sworn-in government over the next 100 days. Although we agree with new Leader of the Opposition Mia Mottley when she says that the government needs some time to settle, by the same token, we feel that before they start to get comfortable in their Italian tailored suits, we are obligated to lobby some of our early concerns.

Leading up to and during the general election recently concluded, the issuance of a cheque for $75,000 which was payable to the former Prime Minister Owen Arthur and donated by Caribbean Commercial Bank was made a ‘bombshell’ issue by the Democratic Labour Party (DLP). Barbadians were told, and the markings on the paid cheque confirms, that the cheque was deposited to Owen Arthur’s personal account at First Caribbean International Bank in Speightown. The DLP alleges that there is something sinister about the transaction. In response, Arthur explained that he used the funds to support some of his party colleagues who needed financial assistance in their political campaigns. According to Thompson there was no declaration of the donation by Arthur in the 2003 General Election which is required under the Laws of Barbados.

We had hoped that our Media Houses who have been touted by many as being full of journalistic standards, and have now found a voice in the post-Arthur era, would have been asking some tough questions on this issue. Are we going to let this matter die and continue on a course called, business as usual?

On 29 November 2007, Peter Hain, MP informed the Electoral Commission that he had not fully reported to the Commission donations he had received for his Labour Party deputy leadership campaign. Mr Hain has since met with the Commission and provided additional information about donations he received. The Electoral Commission has undertaken a thorough review of this information. Following discussions with the Metropolitan Police Service and the Crown Prosecution Service, the Electoral Commission has now referred matters to the Metropolitan Police for them to consider whether an investigation should commence – we wish to thank a BU family member for drawing this article to our attention

Source: BBC News

People who have been following the matter quoted above should be able to draw some similarities to the issue of the $75,000.00 cheque donation which was negotiated by Arthur on his personal account. If we accept that the monies were not declared as election campaign financing in 2003, is this not a clear breech of the Laws of Barbados? If we proceed on this basis then it begs the role of the Electoral Commission in Barbados. We have heard David Thompson speaking to investigations soon to be started into the ABC Highway and other projects contracted by the previous government. Despite our best effort, we cannot find any record where Prime Minister Thompson is speaking to the issue of what the new government plans to do about Arthur’s non-declaration of the donation.

They are some who doubt our integrity and believe that we are driven by party loyalties. We will not waste our time by responding to those critics. We will simply let our articles do the talking. We will feature this issue until we hear some plausible explanation from the relevant government agency as to why this matter should not be handed to the Director of Public Prosecutors.

53 thoughts on “What About The Cheque Prime Minister David Thompson?

  1. David I agree with you, for far too long politicians have been getting away with nonsense. We get all the talk on the platforms but when it comes to action nada.
    If the laws were broken by the previous prime minister then it is incumbent upon this government to ensure that justice is served.
    Justice delayed is justice denied

  2. David,

    “Despite our best effort we cannot find any record Prime Minister Thompson speaking to the issue of what the new government plans to do about Arthur’s non-declaration of the donation.”

    And you will never hear another shite from the PM about it either. Dah cheque dead. In a few days, or weeks or months from now de two o dem (Thompson and Arthur) will be photographed greeting each other at some event or other and we will be told how “mature” our Bajan leaders are.

    And you are a real ass if you think that Barbados is England.


  3. And you will never hear another shite from the PM about it either.


    Unless we remind him, which I’m sure that BU won’t fail to do. Anyhow, the new govt. needs time and can’t achieve everything in its first 100 days!!!!

  4. David, I agree. The heat of the platform accusations has cooled to a luke warm squeek. We must keep the pressure on this issue plus others that were raised.

    When will forensic auditors be commissioned to investigate:

    The construction contracts and awarding of concessions at GAIA, 3S and the highway, VECO and the Prison, GEMS, and Greenland. What about the PM’s claims against Hallam Nicholls and his procurement contracts, will these be investigated. What about the 400 video lottery terminals that the PM said were sitting in the port, where are they now and will they be sent packing or quietly unleashed on our citizens?

    I agree with you that it cannot be business as usual. For the government of this island to gain credibility and the confidence of the people we need a full investigation and prosecution if wrong doing has been found.

  5. Talking about business as usual has anyone read the newspaper report that Patrick Gollop is tipped to be the new GM of CBC? If this is the case we want to register our strong opposition from early. It cannot be business as usual Mr. PM.

  6. Welcome to the real world !!!

    There are situations and decisions that take place behind closed doors without which NO candidate of whatever political persuasion is allowed to ascend to the seat of power.

    There is much on this subject to be read (note: this is not peculiar to Barbados alone).

    Hope springs eternal but time will tell whether this Prime Minister is willing to “buck” the trend.

  7. Prime Minister David Thompson used several occasions in the recent past, particularly, when he was the Opposition Leader right after the resignation of Clyde Mascoll, to severely criticize the then BLP Government for failing to do “anything to contain spiralling prices in Barbados”. One such occasion was in his reply to the then Prime Minister, Owen Arthur, Financial Statement and Budgetary Proposals 2007, in the House of Assembly.

    Moreover, it must be stated that in that said reply, he asserted “that a DLP Administration will not be beholden to any interest group in Barbados and that we will take the fight to those who are responsible for artificially increasing the price of goods in Barbados”. Quotes taken from the Barbados Advocate, Friday, March 16, 2007.

    Yes, Mr. Thompson was bang on, then. He was, indeed, right for being against the substantially rising costs of living in Barbados. We in the PDC were and still are firmly against such cost of living increases, which continue up to today.

    Anyhow, look how things change sometimes, politically and otherwise!! The Prime Minister goes before a Barbados Chamber and Commerce and Industry organized gathering on Wednesday, January 23, 2008, and appears to have made a major climb and tone down in relationship to changes in the verbal, emotional, and bodily languages used by him, when one looks at the time when he had his last stint as Opposition Leader, and now when he is Prime Minister. While he dealt with the issue of cost of living, among other issues, and said emphatically that the cost of living is the three main priorities of this new government, it must be said that with regard to his pronouncing on this issue, he totally lacked the passion, vigour and masterfulness that we saw when he was Opposition Leader, and therefore must have failed to make those Captains of Industry, whom he has previously identified as being also behind these skyrocketing cost of living increases, and some of whom no doubt were in attendance at that BCCI gathering, “tremble in their boots” for the political and commercial wrongs that they too have been perpetrating on the masses and middle classes of people of Barbados, and failed also to make them fear for or submit to the positive, rational, and enormous political, social, finacial and material changes that would otherwise be coming to Barbados with his government being in office.

    But, alas, these failings could have been expected, if one had, et al, properly scutinized the conservative aspects of the 2008 DLP election manifesto about the development of country being essentialy a PARTNERSHIP between capital (meaning corporate-oriented leadership), labour ( meaning trade union-oreiented leadership) and the Government ( meaning party-oriented leadership). And so, the essence of the occassion seemed more like it was business as usual for the elite and their representatives and their governing alliance. It more appeared that at this gathering that Mr. Thompson was an appendage of them, or some intermediary between them and this new Administration, rather than a prime minister newly elected by mainly the masses and middle classes and with a bold and imaginative national plan to implement for their great benefit and the country’s benefit. Note though, such a plan does NOT exist!!

    Finally, if the general themes and delivery of those and the cordiality of that gathering on the occasion of a presentation by the Prmie Minister to this particular BCCI event are any to go by relative to how the future goverance and directional path of Barbados will be for at least the next five years, esp. where the masses and middle classes are concerned, then believe it these masses and middle classes on the whole must certainly NOT expect any great deliverance and salvation from the social, financial and other difficulties they presently find themselves in, and which, very tragically speaking, were seriously helped brought about by the last BLP government.


  8. PDC,

    I pass you by the bottom of Victoria Street where you does sell bout three weeks ago, and you was deh hollering about “Time fuh change!” I did almos open my mout tuh tell yuh dat 3 to 4 is also a change, but I pass you and went long bout my business and en pick my teet.

    I tell wunna fools long ago (pun de internet, not face tuh face) dat it will be business as usual in Barbados aftuh de elections. I ole enuff tuh have seen government change several times bout hay, and not one ting en gine change.

    The Barbados you see today is the result of years of successive good government by both the DLP and the BLP, who are two sides of the same coin. Yuh din realise dat “time fuh change” only mean changing which side o de coin yuh looking at?

    Neither one will deviate from the path we have travelled on for so long… the RIGHT path.

    Long Live De Barbados Labour Party!!!!

    Long Live De Democratic Labour Party!!!!

    Long Live Barbados!!!!

    B ` F ` P ` E

  9. “Cheque? Cheque what?”

    The PM accomplished what he set out to accomplish, and amnesia as already set-in while the dupes are left to ponder why.

  10. Talking about business as usual has anyone read the newspaper report that Patrick Gollop is tipped to be the new GM of CBC? If this is the case we want to register our strong opposition from early. It cannot be business as usual Mr. PM.
    Anyone know the real reason with Mr. Gallop leaving Starcom?

  11. PDC,

    I pass you by the bottom of Victoria Street where you does sell bout three weeks ago, and you was deh hollering about “Time fuh change
    this is too funny lol hehehehe

  12. The government changes and nothing changes. Crimes not investigated, and integrity legislation put on the back burner.

    Could it be that there is a body of power greater than government, that benefits from the status quo?

    There is another possibility.
    Abraham Lincoln said: “Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth.”

    Is our present government firmly in control and is it saying: “Government of the people, by the government, for the government, shall not perish from Barbados”?

  13. This is democracy at its very best. People seems to be afraid when certain prominent individuals have to wave a flag due to party affiliation. We might argue why someone should remove his or her cloak and expose them self as a canvasser for a particular party.

    I say that to say this. Back in the Sandiford administration we had Rosemary Alleyne alligning herself with the DLP, and the BLP was against the move. In the recent election, we had Patrick Gollop electioneering for the DLP, even coming on Brass Tacks with a spin stating the DLP conceptualised and build the ABC highway. We had Tony along with the lady from the NCF electioneering for the BLP.

    This behaviour is view to me as a positive sign for Democracy based on Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Association and which show the outside world that we are a matured country without political deaths like certain countries which I prefer not to name.

    Knowing the affiliation of Gollop, we know that he will have to show the public that his behaviour is not bias. As the going say, you know your enemy and what he/she might do, but you will never know your friend – that is the one that could be dangerous.

    I prefer to wait and see who ever gain the GM position, what he/she will do to stop the financial haemorrhaging of the corporation and allow more channels on MY TV.

  14. There is nothing wrong if PG is made GM of CBC. He is an experienced broadcaster and secondly he is not an aloof person. CBC will now have more freedom to be more expressive. It is a known fact that whenever a BLP administration is in power it controls CBC in a repressive manner. Not so with the DLP.

  15. Hello Folks on this site.

    Do you all remember me ?

    I am Barbados’ best trained Economist.

    Will anyone recommend me to PM David Thompson for a job ?

    I am patiently waiting.

    Your friend,

    Clyde Mascoll

  16. Tony Hall

    I would not go as far as to say that the B’s are guilty of this abuse and the D’s not. I can remember a different set of DLP ministers using CBC as their mouthpiece pre-1994. There is some archaic belief that the ruling party must control the thoughts and minds of the populace. Open the market and let’s be done.

  17. David said that the $75,000 cheque was not reflected in Owen’s election return and therefore we could only assume that it was not used in the 2003 election and that it therefore went into Owen’s personal coffers. Owen said that he paid the money over to the party and that the funds were used by his party colleagues. So I don’t know if anyone can ever prove in court that there was any improper behaviour here.

    What needs to be investigated is the Hallam Nichols connection with government procurement, and the charge in relation to a commission on lottery ticket sales by Eastern Lottery (the Johnny Cochrane story). The financial arrangements involving the highway expansion and the new prison should be fully investigated for excessive or improper commission arrangements, given the involvement of the the contracted parties in corruption lawsuits overseas.

    Also, many people have commented about vote buying in this election. I am shocked that this seems to have become the norm in Barbados, and we need to move forcibly to stamp it out. Isn’t it clear that politicians who will pay cash for votes will more likely than not accept bribes and kickbacks too?

    Check out these comments from Errol Barrow’s “Mirror Image” speech:

    “Now what has bothered me in this society is that every time after elections, people expect certain things to take place. And although the law says that he that giveth is as much guilty of bribery and corruption under the Corrupt Practices Act as he that receiveth, we know that even on polling day, people were given envelopes with $100 bills in them.

    Philip Greaves and Asquith Phillips and I sat down trying to get people to bring affidavits, so that we could lock up some of them. Our own people, registered Democratic Labour Party people, said they were not prepared to go into court and swear.

    So what kind of mirror image would you have of yourself? If there are corrupt ministers in Barbados tonight, you have made them corrupt.”

  18. frankology,
    What is your objection to Patrict Gollop? He has managerial skills and can hold his own among media personnel on the island. If Allyson Leacock could be a General Manager..why not PG?

  19. David Thompson in one of his election speeches sought to address the issue of why he did not act on this check information, within the Law. He said something to the effect that the way the current chief Justice, a man who one morning was cussing the DLP and it’s members was, by the same afternoon appointed to be the Island chief Justice, did not inspire his confidence to do the right thing, he also mention something untowards about the current DPP and thats why he had no one and no where to turn too in Barbados regarding the check information other than the people of Barbados, who will be the unltimate judge and jury. I need to fing that clip because i think it signal what David’s intent was all along, which I now believe does not include anything beyond the exposition at Hagget Hall.

    you can read the law that could in the least have been use to convene an investigation.


  20. What is your objection to Patrict Gollop?
    Did I object to Patrick Gollop, I was looking at his openness in his affiliation with the Dees, I show others who had partisan political support, but I state “This behaviour is view to me as a positive sign for Democracy based on Freedom of Expression and Freedom of Association”, thus I have no objection in Patrick or any person with political affiliation since it is clear to see an enemy instead the deceit of a friend.

    So let me state I have no objection with Patrick or any other candidate, once we see a financial turn around in expenditure. Peace.

  21. frankology // January 25, 2008 at 3:28 pm

    What is your objection to Patrict Gollop?



    I am sure you would have PERSONNALLY recommended the former member of ST. MICHAEL NORTH – WEST !

  22. PG will make an excellent GM..Andi Akele et al would now be able to cuss on air and get drunk in the studios….with the blessing of PG De GM

  23. Before PGs appointed if this is true the true reason why he had to leave VOB should be discussed. It is important for the public to know if remedial action was taken, and if all parties are satisfied with the outcome.

  24. I consider myself non-partisan. One of the things that struck me in this election, and I think struck other non-partisan people, is that both sides spent a lot of money. Thanks to our new Prime Minister, I have some idea of who supported the BLP. An off-shore bank that seems to be unknown except for this donation, made a few years ago, and discussed if I recall correctly a few years ago in Parliament. It should be pointed out that when in opposition, PM David Thompson incorrectly suggested that this 2004 donation mattered greatly because the PM as Finance Minister regulates banks. In fact, it is the Central Bank of Barbados that regulates banks and so the scope of harm that this donation could have caused the national interests of Barbados is modest. Those who know her will know that the good Governor of the Bank would not be selling Barbados down the river. That said, I am against the buying of political influence completely. The BLP was in power long enough to come up with integrity legislation that reduced all the speculation. The previous decision (was it made by Arthur’s govenrment?) to make the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, the Lead of the Opposition is an excelent start, but only a start.

    Who finances the DLP? Whoever it is, seems to be as deep pocketed as the BLP’s financiers. People tell me that one significsant contributor is CLICO, a Trinidadian financial company that owns a lot of land in Barbados. Is this right? I do not know this myself, but if it is so, it would be worrying because overdue influence of CLICO on land use in Barbados could be quite damaging. Far more damaging than the influence of a bank that is no longer in Barbados.

    I came across many stories on election day of voters being offered cash, or in one case weed, to vote and this also worries me greatly. I think we need campaign finance reform or our precious democracy will be undermined and will become the big business that is US politics.

    I would propose that the main political parties be given a subvention from government that should fully meet their costs – say B$1m per year – and that as a result of this, all other donations should be illegal. State funding if parties is practiced in many countries, of which Germany comes immediately to mind. Once State funding is in place, all ministers and senior public servants should be required to declare a register of their assets every year. We would have to find a formula that gave opportunity to a third party – say a reduced subvention on the basis of a petition. However, $2-$3m would be a very small price to pay to preserve our democracy.

  25. TG are you sure about your statement that the Central is ultimately responsible for regulating banks? The act repeatedly states that the Central is answerable to the Minister of Finance for almost all that it does.

  26. The principal regulation of Banks in Barbados (as elsewhere) is carried out by the Central Bank of Barbados, (CBB).

    Basle 1 rules, (soon to be Basle 2) supervised by the CBB, determine the capital adequacy requirements of banks, the Ministry of Finance has no influence on that.

  27. I am sure you would have PERSONNALLY recommended the former member of ST. MICHAEL NORTH – WEST !
    I will ignore your sick mind

  28. Is it not amazing how people have started to find there tongues with the demise of Owen Arthur?

    Published on: 1/27/08.

    FORMER PRIME MINISTER Owen Arthur’s politics of inclusion and a weak campaign caused the Barbados Labour Party (BLP) to lose the Government.

    In two separate no-holds-barred critiques of the BLP’s performance in the January 15 general election, party stalwarts Clyde Griffith and Aaron Truss have put the blame squarely on Arthur’s shoulders.

    However, both praised the work of the former leader particularly in the area of the economy, saying history would be kind to him.

    Griffith, who served as general secretary of the BLP and also in the Cabinet, said Arthur became prone to error in the last term of his party’s Government. He intimated too that Arthur might have overstayed his time “without realising how the burdens of office can take their toll”.

    Referring to Arthur as insecure, he said the former leader also had a constant need to satisfy “ad naseum” the elite of the BLP.

    Griffith also chided some BLP candidates who, he said, had lost touch with their constituents and “avoided them like the plague”.

    But it was a poorly run campaign and lack of an effective public relations effort that nailed the BLP’s defeat, he said.

    “The Achilles heel of the BLP was its lack of a good public relations effort promoting its accomplishments for the past four years.”

    Griffith said proper public relations was particularly absent in the handling of matters relating to the Queen Elizabeth Hospital and the ABC Highway.

    In turn, Truss, who served in the Tom Adams administration, strongly opposed Arthur’s politics of inclusion.

    “I have never believed in the [Owen Arthur’s] politics of inclusion because it excluded Barbados Labour Party people . . . . I believe the politics of inclusion has to do with bringing over people at the grass root level; not bringing over people at the top of the Democratic Labour Party,” he said.

    He added: “I think one of the points the [public opinion] pollsters have not looked at is the bringing over of Clyde Mascoll in St Michael North West.

    “The Barbados Labour Party’s family said, ‘No, this is the last straw’. You cannot come into a constituency in 2003 and tell me to vote against a man and galvanise my support and have rank and file supporters at work canvassing against a man and then bring him back in 2008 and tell us to vote for him.

    “People become confused,” charged Truss, who had predicted a win by the Democratic Labour Party at the polls. (CM)

  29. Well Masscot, Gabby, Dr, Belley and Prescotty, may be you all will now join PEP. I can’t see what some of you will have in common with the power brokers of the BLP, now that the former PM Authur is nolonger there, as a so called “champion of the people”. I refer to those same brokers who Clyde Griff in the article carried in today’s Sunday Sun, stated that Mr Arthur felt insecure in relation to them.

  30. I call upon the New government of Barbados to look into the crappy system of promotion currently used in the Government Service. This crap of first come first serve needs to be thrown out the window along with all the persons who are not prone to change and its new innovations. Where is Public Sector Reform. Where is promotion by merit and prerequisite qualifications. I will give place to seninority and the promotion thereof on the basis that persons have a sound record of productivity and exemplified ingenuity coupled with the fact that they have pursued their personal development through the acquisition of relevant qualifications. There are many square pegs in round wholes and their inability to move to embrace new technologies and advancements is keeping us stayed behind the times. Highy qualified persons that should be holding key positions are being overlooked. IT IS TIME TO PAY PEOPLE FOR WHAT THEY ARE WORTH and acknowledge their qualifications in the process. If not the mass exodus of our intellectuals will continue. STOP THE CRAP AND DEAL THE FACTS.

  31. Thomas Gresham, the $75,000 cheque was issued by Caribbean Commercial Bank, which was a local bank (since merged with RBTT Bank), not an obscure offshore bank. (The photo of the cheque is at the top of this article).

    The Minister of Finance does not directly regulate banks in Barbados, but appoints the Governor and Board of the Central Bank, approves the issuance and revocation of banking licenses, and performs several other functions in relation to the banking sector, under the Financial Institutions Act and the Central Bank of Barbados Act.

    However the crux of the matter is really that it is clearly improper for a commercial bank to pay $75,000 to the Minister of Finance, and reflect this in its books as a donation. Any campaign contributions should be paid directly to the Barbados Labour Party. What makes it worse is that the bank issued a cheque to the Barbados Labour Party on the same day as the one to Owen Arthur – why??

    I suspect that there is a lot more to the story than has been made public, but what we know certainly does not reflect well on the former PM.

  32. Dear Brutus,

    Then let it go to court.

    (I am an expert on banking regulation. The erroneous suggestion made by the new PM was that the donation could have led to a different regulation of the bank than would otherwise occur and that would be harmful to our financial system.

    The financial activity carried out by Banks is not supervised by the Ministry but by the CBB using very clear rules (Basle 1 rules). Anyone familiar with the Barbados system will know that a call to the Governor to ask her to apply different rules to a bank will not be heeded. Some would rather she were more flexible.

    Moreover, the consistency of the CBB’s supervison of banks is looked over by a number of bodies including the IADB’s financila corruption unit and the IMF’s Financial Sector Assessment team and others. )

    Personally, I do not think any pary should accept any donation form any company and that they should be state funded to ensure there is no opportunity for undue influence.

    Tell me, should CLICO now stop funding the DLP government to ensure that there is no influence on government decisions (especially regarding land use) pertaining to them? The same logic applied by Thompson would suggest so. This will be a good test of his willingness to make real change. Lets be hopeful, but also vigilant.

    Should CLICO end all of its contributions to the DLP now it is in office?

  33. TG you are spouting theory and some of it is not correct. Years ago there was a famous quote made that the Governor of the Central Bank is a creature of the Prime Minister. What the PM wants in our system of government the PM gets. Also you should stop bringing private sector examples. They are just not relevant to the argument.

  34. Dear David,

    I assure you this is not theory. I work with banks regulated by the CBB. In Barbados banking regulation under Basle 1 rules are quite rigidly applied and rule based and not very discretionary. The Bank takes its role very seriously.

    I dont understand your dislike of bringing in CLICO. Both banks and CLICO are in the private sector. Indeed, CLICO is a financial institution (its base was an old life insurance company).

    Clico is a highly relevant example because one of Clico’s strategy is to buy land cheaply in the hope for land use changes that raises the value of that land. The fact that they are a contributor to the party now responsible for land use changes is highly relevant.

    You can’t have your cake and eat it. Either we dont like contributors to a government party, who may influence decisions with commercial advantage to the contributor, or not. We can’t not like it for a BLP government, but turn a blind eye for the DLP government. I have always thought of you as a man of principle.

    TG We don’t like the comparison between CLICO and banks because CLICO is not regulated by the Central Bank directly, banks are very much so. This means that the Prime Minister who has direct report has tremendous influence on what occurs at the Tom Adams Financial Centre, just have a look at the Board of the Central Bank. On the subject of Campaign Financing you should do a search on BU using those as key words.


  35. Thomas Gresham, you stated that:

    “Anyone familiar with the Barbados system will know that a call to the Governor to ask her to apply different rules to a bank will not be heeded. ”

    Are you really suggesting think that the Prime Minister (her boss) would meet with the same difficulty? However, this is not relevant. It is the mere APPEARANCE of impropriety that is the problem. Basle rules do not affect whether CCB gets preferential treatment with government deposits and financing arrangements, but the appearance of objectivity on the part of the PM is jeopardized by the personal donations.

    At any rate, you have raised several matters that are not relevant and you have not addressed the main irregularities raised by David Thompson:
    – that the level of donations by Caribbean Commercial Bank to the BLP and individual candidates (totalling $755,000) were unusually large, especially given the relatively small size of the bank
    – that a personal cheque was written to the PM on the same day that a cheque was written to the BLP
    – that these cheques were all signed by then CEO Mariano Browne and there was no evidence of approval by the Board of Directors.

    If CLICO is found to have written personal cheques to David Thompson, then we would have to ask similar questions (especially if, like the former PM, he is responsible for town planning). We will definitely have to watch closely to see what benefits CLICO and Leroy Parris derive under this new administration.

    If however you are going to raise questions about private interest financing of political parties generally, then you must ask about the financing of BOTH parties. The BLP tried to portray that the DLP spent more money than they did in the last campaign, but I am not convinced. As Thompson himself admitted, many companies in Barbados contribute to both parties.

  36. Dear Brutus,

    I am familiar with the CBB and yes, thank god, in Barbados, the PM cannot call the Governor and ask her to give preferential treatment in the regulation of a bank. Those who know this Governor will atest to that.

    However, it is my point exactly that we should be concerned about the financing of both parties – which is why I raise the issue of CLICO, when this blog had been exlcusively been about the BLP.

    But my further point, is that I do not approve of this donation to the BLP, I do not wish to rely upon the good behaviour of the Governor and I do approve of any donation by corporate interests to any party.

    We need to get the parties in a position where they do not need this funding and so we can ban it altogether. This means state funding of the parties. I have raised this issue and that of CLICO for us to move forward.

    I sense that we agree in some part.

  37. Excuse the typo, I do NOT approve of any corporate donation to any party because of the potential conflicts it creates. We need campaign finance reform and State funding of parties.

  38. Dear David,

    Whether CLICO is regulated by the CBB is not relevant, the question is, is the government in a position to make decisions that are of commercial advantage to CLICO, who is a contributor to the governing party. That is clearly most relevant.

    I agree with the calls for campaign finance reform.

  39. Interesting discussion, the financing of elections in Barbados “lacks transparency”. I doubt we will ever hear any mention of this cheque again as that will prompt questions about “Where exactly DID all that DLP money come from?” We accept that it wasn’t Taiwan, but it had to come from somewhere.

    I tend to like the option of having the treasurey finance political parties.


  40. How come no one was asking about party financing when the BLP was blowing loads of cash in the last election and the DLP had little or none to spend?

  41. There is a saying that life is about making choices. David has an opportunity to make a real difference by challenging the status quo and creating a legacy very early as a leader as one who delivered the mandate of change. Of course he could carry on with the status quo and we have business as usual. The ball is in his court. We will reserve judgment until after his government’s first 100 days in office.

  42. David,

    I’d agree with you that a new government, always has the opportunity to make major changes before the special interests get too cozy.

    I’d like to think that this would happen in this case, but my general opinon of politicians (both B and D) tells me not to get my hopes up.


  43. Thomas Gresham, your point is nonsense.

    You don’t know what you are talking about for at least one simple reason (perhaps even more than one!): Who owned the Bank that gave Owen the $75,000.00? Clico Holdings (Barbados) Limited! So…

    Who was Chairman of CCB – David Shorey! Oops!

    What did CCB get? The financing deal for the Coast Guard Station, the Hall of Justice and Gems! For the second-smalest Bank in Barbados. Interesting.

    Last point: the powers the Governor of the Central Bank dispenses are all DELEGATED powers! Delegated by who? The Minister of Finance. What is the law? He who delegates can also relieve the delegatee!

    Perhaps David Thompson was very skillfully making a point to Barbados as a whole.

    What a web…

  44. I really dont know about this 75k check.. it would be a real shame if this thing is fully exposed.. I say drop it.. let it die …. I am not Arthur fan, never was never will be but I say let sleeping dogs lie.. this is my humble opinion..

  45. Pingback: Former Barbados PM Owen Arthur - Who Money-Laundered “Campaign Donations” Through Personal Bank Account - Now Heads Election Monitoring Group! « Barbados Free Press

  46. What about the cheque, Prime Minister Thompson? Why haven’t you done anything about it? Were you lying when you displayed it, or have things changed now that you have the power?

    Mr. Thompson, if you lied you should clear Mr. Arthur’s good name.

    If you were telling the truth, then you should pursue investigations and charges or at least put the explanation on the public record.

    More of the same, I’m afraid.

  47. Red Lake Lassie, you should clear Mr. Arthur’s good name.

    What breed of idiot are you ??
    Clear his good name, where have you been living?
    It must be somewhere in the outback, because his name has not been a good name for some years now.

  48. David,

    Are we living in 2 different worlds? Why was the former Prime Minister, O. Arthur addressed in your blog as the late Prime Minister? I hope it was just a printer’s error

    Thanks for identifying the error!


  49. A CCB cheque was produced to make the case. CCB was owned by Clico at the time and we all know the connection between Clico and Thompson and Leroy Parris. How do i know that my Personal information will not be exposed if i doing business with CLICO. This is a serious matter.

  50. Gapp not for shite! If it was your family, they would go to jail!


    that is why we find ourselves going around in circles we dont want to face the truth! That is the why the police get way with a lot of shite and politicians and everyone else excepting the TAXPAYERS!



Leave a comment, join the discussion.