← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

In the aftermath of the recent spike in world oil prices to $150.00 per barrel and the slide to less than USD80.00 in recent days, it has triggered a fusillade of commentary from Leader of the Opposition Mia Mottley. Prime Minister David Thompson has been curtly responsive to the cry from the Opposition leader by explaining that his government’s philosophy is one which frowns on borrowing to pay-down debt for energy consumption.

The issue here is whether government should immediately pass-on the benefit of a lowering oil price to Barbadians: Leader of the Opposition says yes because energy is a key input to the production organs in the economy and price movement has a ubiquitous impact on the cost of living of ALL Barbadians. Prime Minister David Thompson says no because his government is fundamentally against borrowing to pay for energy consumption, added to the equation is the debt currently on the books of BNOC as a result of the heavy subsidization of oil imports by the previous government and the current threshold subsidized prizce which the government has in place.

The BU family can correct us if we are wrong but the debt to be paid down we estimate to be close $180 million dollars.

The current situation which the Barbados government finds itself is an unenviable one. As we survey the behaviours of Barbadians in the post-$150 per barrel period, we have not detected any serious and significant attempt to engage energy efficient habits. The harsh reality given the current state of events which affect fossil fuel production, a return to a high oil price cycle will return sooner than later. In case you have forgotten, we have the issue of the speculators in the financial markets who at the drop of a hat may speculate as to the future price of oil based on what some believe are disingenuous factors. There is the increasing demand from emerging economic powers like China and India, we cannot forget the peak-oil theory which suggests that drilling for oil in the future will become a more expensive proposition, we can list other factors. Perhaps the biggest factor which we prefer to isolate is the geo-political factors which make the prediction of a stable oil  price very difficult. Most of the world’s oil is located in the Arab world. The perennial tensions which have affected East West relations are well documented.

The discovery of Information and Computer Technology (ICT) has impacted mankind both in business and leisure endeavours in all ways we have to function in our existence. The visionaries among us now say that it is Energy Technology (ET) that will sustain man’s quest to more efficiently sustain our existence on the planet. Prime Minister David Thompson has given as his reason for not heavily subsidizing energy consumption by Barbadians as the need to identify resources to invest in other sources of energy, which we have referred to as ET.

We support the government on this bold move which is visionary in our view. We regret that the Barbadian who has often been described as more educated has to be dragged kicking and screaming to appreciate the concept of removing our dependence on fossil fuel. It is the only way we can buffer the external shocks created by buying fossil fuels in a volatile market. It is interesting also that St. Kitts, Nevis, Dominica to name some of our smaller and “so called” less developed neighbours have started down the road of ET.

In 2008 we have Leader of the Opposition building her case on a model which has served us well in the past, Prime Minister David Thompson not unlike US presidential candidate Barack Obama has determined that the time is now to go down a different road.

Where there is no vision the PEOPLE…


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

33 responses to “Where There Is No Vision The PEOPLE Will Perish”


  1. David,

    “We regret that the Barbadian who has often been described as more educated has to be dragged kicking and screaming to appreciate the concept of removing our dependence on fossil fuel.”

    I think this has to do with how we are educated. We are educated to do nothing for ourselves and we think that once you have money that will do all. Our educational system prepares us to be dependent and we know nothing of being self-sufficient.


  2. David,

    “It is interesting also that St. Kitts, Nevis, Dominica to name some of our smaller and “so called” less developed neighbours have started down the road of ET.”

    This is an erroneous statement. We should look at what we have that is good. We are miles ahead in solar heating; I would guess more than 50% of the population as well as industry. What is this saving; suppose we did not have it, what would be the cost?


  3. @ROK

    You have to examine our statement in the context of a national grid and the need to transform from being fossil fuel dependent. In Barbados solar energy results in energy savings but we have not moved forward to integrate this technology in the national grid.

    We are talking about making the leap. Many of the smaller islands are making overtures to sell energy to neighbouring islands.


  4. These questions have been asked before but have not been answered.

    To whom is this $180 million owed?

    How was it arrived at?

    I am not being facetious or mischevious! I really wish to be educated on how petroleum products are supplied to and paid for by the country.

    On a related note, I am quite skeptical about the sincerity of the Government’s concern to implement alternative energy technology. The Town and Country Planning Department has requested an expensive EIA with regard to the impact on bats and birds by the windmills being proposed by Light and Power. The week after the TCP department made known its requirement, the PM gave a speech on the importance of developing alternative energy. It is even more incongruous given that the Minister of Energy and the Minister of Planning is the same person – the Prime Minister!


  5. ‘Prime Minister David Thompson says his government is fundamentally against borrowing to pay for energy consumption.’

    This policy, to me, seems prudent.


  6. David,

    “We regret that the Barbadian who has often been described as more educated has to be dragged kicking and screaming to appreciate the concept of removing our dependence on fossil fuel.”

    ***********************************
    David, I challenge you to give me three examples which demonstrate that Bajans are as intelligent as you would want to make out…..


  7. @Bush tea

    The fact that we need to have this conversation is concerning. If we answer your question the next question will be how should we measure intelligence.

    Do we measure it our ability to promote a material lifestyle relative to our neighbouring islands? How about our ability to manage/educate our HR to implement robust health, educational, parliamentary structures to support a relatively stable social and political climate.

    Of course all of the above can be debated relative to what measures we want to use.


  8. The Prime Minister wildly barks (our words) that it is ludicrous for some people to argue that government should borrow to pay for the consumption of petroleum products by citizens (Pg. 3, Weekend Nation, October 10, 2008). Of course, such hogwash reminds us of one of the supposed illogics behind former Prime Minister Arthur’s motives for NOT letting Barbados join the Petro-Caribe Initiative some time ago – NO to consuming energy products, now, and then, later, incurring debt for future generations. What unadulterated set of foolishness from an equally foolish former prime minister!!!

    But, can any one tell us what is it NOT terribly worse than that – grossly evil and contemptible, we say – than for this DLP Government, as well as ALL other previous governments in the colonial and post-colonial history of Barbados, to have STOLEN and to be CONTINUING TO STEAL PORTIONS OF THE INCOMES of the relevant people, businesses and entities in Barbados? Huh, through murderous TAXATION?

    Mr. Thompson must again be told in no uncertain terms that it is evil, wicked and wrong for the Government/State to TAX/STEAL/ROB the relevant people, businesses and other entities of portions of their INCOMES in this country. Moreover, Mr. Thompson must be made to read the Holy Bible again – the Christian Bible, which says in the Commandments – one of them – that Thou shall NOT STEAL!!

    However, with regard to the question of the DLP government borrowing money for consumption of petroleum products, or to help repay the debt of the BNOC, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG with any body or any entity in Barbados – including the Government – borrowing to consume petroleum products. Certainly, it has fundamentally more to do with the context within which such borrowing would be being done – rather than pure act of borrowing and for what reasons!!

    Hence, were a PDC Government in place today, we would all like now have made sure that in cases where qualified persons and entities in Barbados would have been using the financial system of Barbados to borrow for non-productive purposes, that new and relevant laws of this country would have stipulated that over the duration of those loans that the borrowers would have been made to repay far less than the principal borrowed. Thus, if this future PDC government would have borrowed one week ago BDS $ 10 million from a locally based bank for the purchase of 3 million litres of diesel for any of its non-income generating entities’ vehicles to drive on the roads of Barbados (non-productive business), the relevant laws would stipulate that this PDC Government would only have been made to repay about 5/8 of that in total, and to do so in less than the time required to repay. Simple as that!!

    But, let us say that this Government would have instead at that particular time borrowed the same amount of money for the same amount of litres to be used by any income generating productive entities like theBarbados Transport Board, the Barbados Water Authority, the Barbados Port Authority etc., such actions would have mean – under the new and relevant laws put in place by a PDC Government granting the right of the State/Government, persons and other entities in Barbados to get Productive Loans from any Financial Institution WITHOUT having to repay such loans and partly because of the need for them to be properly rewarded for their previous contributions to National Income – that such a regime would have been ensured of the opportunity of NOT HAVING TO REPAY NOT EVEN A CENT for the BDS $ 10 million borrowed in that instance. Only the transactions costs incurred with the bank would this PDC Government have to pay.

    Some of the reasons – other than for rewarding previous contributions to National Income – for a PDC Government having to institute such would be to make sure that DEBT becomes almost NON-existent in this country or that it is eliminated as quickly as possible, and to make sure that money circulates as quickly as possible in line with production/productivity goals of persons, businesses and others including the State.

    Finally, Mr. Thompson, that clown, Mr. Darcy Boyce, and some of his other advisors must be informed that CONSUMPTION EXPENDITURE (as opposed to INVESTMENT EXPENDITURE) on a yearly basis in Barbados forms an overwhelming proportion of GDP of the country, and too is a fundamental cause of overall business and commercial activity in Barbados.

    Therefore, consumption of Goods and Services is very very important to a country’s present and further development – both of which are therefore tied in with the future of younger generations who must be left significant national social, material and financial foundations in place.

    With regard to Petroleum/Fuel these too are so indispensably important to commercial and industrial activity in Barbados, that little business and commercial activity can be conducted WITHOUT them. So, really if a government had to borrow reasonable amounts of money, even with proper loan conditions attached, in order to secure consumption of petroleum products, or to secure repayment of the debt of the BNOC, could mean that such borrowings could be seen as necessary in the bid to further develop this country. RIGHT!!?

    PDC


  9. Oil is bought from Trinidad in US dollars. Bajans buy gas petrol, diesel in Barbados dollars.

    Bajans do not pay for the importation of oil so no matter how high the price is set at the gas station pump, the government will still have to turn to the tourisses and real estate magnates (through the Central Bank) for the currency it needs to buy more oil.

    This talk of subsidy is nonsense. What really is happening is a currency exchange re-evaluation for transactions that involve some oil derived products for sale in the local arena.

    Any debt built up between BNOC and the Min of Finance is convenient bookkeeping, government to government, and imaginary, and can quite easily be repudiated. No one will lose their jobs; on one will lose their heads.


  10. On the issue of oil now that the two major traders in OTC Oil derivatives have given up this type of activity, (Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley) the price of oil as rapidly fallen back by 60% of its peak a few weeks earlier.

    Prof JR with his market fundamentals theory has been proven dead wrong (along with CAT and a lot of others) and David has come out on top with the unregulated traders effect.

    Goble goble goble goble…


  11. BAFBFP
    You are the only person to have responded (intentionally or unintentionally) to my questions. If you are right this would suggest that the government is mismanaging the situation.


  12. @BAFBFP

    Are you not touching on the vagaries of a government managing a balanced budget? If government allows its statutory and other corporations to engage in deficits what is the impact on the economy?

    The government would have to raise taxes to balance or narrow the deficit or increase the money supply. In both cases there are negative side effects i.e. reduce spending power of citizens or increase in inflation (remember that there is a legal limit to the level of overdraft/printing money the government can engage.


  13. Yes, as the headline of this subject states:

    “Where there is NO vision The PEOPLE Will Perish.” (Proverbs 29: 18a).

    Please note, I’ve used emphasis exactly as given by BU!

    First, I stand to be corrected, but this quotation is also used by the BWU, and as far as I’m aware, neither does the BWU acknowledge the text from God’s Word, the Bible.

    Also, the above quote is only half of the verse; the second part states: ” but he that keepeth the law, happy is he.” (Prov. 29: 18b).

    Interestingly, ‘vision’ here is referring to prophetic revelation. ‘Perish’ Literally from the Hebrew means, ‘are let loose, are unrestrained. Without prophetic revelation from God, people are unrestrained and fall under judgment.

    This is reflected in part of BU opening comments:

    “As we survey the behaviour of Barbadians in the post-$150 per barrel period, we have not detected any SERIOUS and SIGNIFICANT attempt to engage energy efficient habits.” emphasis added.

    Yes, I understand that the comments thus far, are primarily from a secular perspective, looking at the economic reality of this world wide impact on Barbadians and their consuming appetite, and are therefore, “..LET LOOSE, are UNRESTRAINED…” as they pursue with wanton abandonment, yielding themselves to a passion or impluse, without inhibition or restraint, in a reckless freedom or manner.

    Are we not, therefore, going to reap what we sow, one way or the other?


  14. Speaking of no vision, what was interesting were the charges leveled at the government today by Senator Thompson on their handling of the Offshore Oil bid in today’s Sunday Sun.

    If what she says is correct, then some hard questions need to be asked and answered. For Government to drop the ball when the stakes are this high speaks to either gross negligence or incompetence.


  15. The broad masses and middle classes of people of Barbados had better sooner rather than later awoken to the REALITY OF THE OUTRIGHT LIES THAT ARE BEING CONSTANTLY FED TO THEM BY SOME OF THE ELITE AND ESP. HELPED BY SOME WITHIN THE GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRACY AND SOME MIDDLE-CLASS PROFESSIONAL BLACKS IN THIS SOCIETY.

    On Sunday’s Getting Down to Brasstacks ( Oct. 12 2008 ) one of the panellists – who may well represent part of the ideological bias within this elite-driven society – belched that it is the state that is the OWNER of ALL the lands in Barbados and that those who are in ownership of title deeds to these lands are being asked to pay tithes – WICKED EVIL TAXATION – to the state for use of these lands.

    Could any one imagine that a person could have been so damned lied and ignorant at the same time? And so uppity, careless and reckless about it too?

    When a caller questioned and at the same time rejected the sickening practice of the State to TAX the INCOMES of most owners of land in this country, it seemed that this so-called panellist, whoever he was, and he was REALLY a total embarrassment to the program and the Radio Station – seemed bent on providing any kind of unstudied, off-the-top-of-your-head, verbal justification and rationalization for that outrageous murderous policy and legal framework in Barbados that allows the state itself to STEAL PORTIONS OF THE INCOMES OF PEOPLE WHO ARE THE REGISTERED “OWNERS” OF LAND IN BARBADOS.

    What is even worse is that the Moderator – Mr Tony Marshall, acquiesced and condoned that utter foolishness!!

    Indeed, that bunkum spat at the listeners by that so-called panellist flies in the face of what various provisions in PROPERTY/LAND LAW, LAND REGISTRATION LAW, SUCCCESSION LAW, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, ETC. in Barbados, and what certain terminologies like, an estate in fee simple absolute in possession in the comon law, and certain court rulings in Barbados regarding “land ownership” by private persons in this country – speak voluminously rightly to – that such persons are indeed “owners” of lands in this country.

    Finally, again, the broad masses and middle classes of people of Barbados must surely FIGHT AGAINST these wicked lies and deceptions that are constantly
    being foisted on them, and FIGHT AGAINST those people that are spreading them with a view of using such lies and deceptions to help keep them in bondage, suppression and sufferation in this country.

    PDC

  16. Trained Economist Avatar
    Trained Economist

    The risks created by an economic strategy rooted in fiscal deficits and relatively high levels of debt, should be one of the major lessons of the major lessons of the current global financial crisis.

    Debt financing (leverage) can really hurt you when the inevitable economic downturns occur. One of the major risks is that precisely when you need a fiscal stimulus you may have very little fiscal slack.


  17. Owen Arthur said that he would not enter Petro caribe because he would not finance current consumption on credit. David Thompson approach to my mind is very similar. Mia Mottley as LOTO is appealing to emotions. We know that this opposition BLP is focus on one thing, recapturing power in the next elections, we know this by Hammie’s insider view, and the most recent declaration by Mia. A party and a people so singularly focus should be view with the greatest skepticism possible.


  18. another tirade of verbiage from The People’s Democratic Congress // October 12, 2008 at 3:00 pm AND The People’s Democratic Congress // October 13, 2008 at 7:04 am

    WILL THESE PEOPLE EVER GET IT?

    Listen PDC … go to Amazon.com and buy a book on effective communication (I doubt you’ll find one in a local ‘bookshop’ because the proprietors of these establishments are still (like so many others locally) still in the dark ages.

    Go to Amazon.com and buy a book on effective communication then MAYBE some peeps will read your submissions.

    Rule #1 — make it short. Rule #2 – address only ONE topic at a time ……….


  19. The Devil
    Sorry I was responding to you.

    David,
    Corporatised government entities like BNOC, wow. If original book entries on the Barbados side of the business activity were done at an exchange rate that would more closely determine the planned and eventual final selling price of the petroleum products, there would be no deficit developed; and why not, it is still a Government institution, and the Central Bank (also Government) which insists on a 1:2 US$ pegging for private firms cannot be expected to treat BNOC (BNOTC or whatever) in the same way, as they (BNOC) is not competing with private entities and is providing a most vital resource in the maintenance of this economy.


  20. @BAFBFP

    You are losing us. Please explain.

    The payment of oil is made in US dollars right?

    If BNOC pays for the oil they have to pay the bank at 2:1. If the government pays for the USD are you saying they should do so at par?

    Trying to keep up with you.


  21. I do not believe that the bank should insist on the 2:1 convention for BNOC, because that is what it is, a convention. Our currency evaluation is not based on gold reserves or on goods and services that we can provide to the rest of the world or even overseas bank balances and investments or arrangements with the biggies like the World Bank or the IMF, we are just a simple pegging to the US. It is improper to develop a charge to tax payers that is developed out of a convention. Adjust the rates that the BNOC will be charged for the purchase of US for bringing in Oil to offset the price increases that would result by sticking to a straight up 2:1. So what..? It’s a Government to Government transaction anyway; internal. If the Government makes a policy to increase the amount charged at the pump, well them that would simply be to reduce demand and not to clear a deficit that they would have created as a result of the approach they used in jumping from the international transaction between Barbados and TnT, and the activities that take place between the Central Bank and BNOC.

    There surely is a better way of doing it perhaps by creating a special account for handling these variations in a way that does not end up being reflected as a debt to cleared.


  22. David,

    I hope you are not really seriously considering what I generously describe as BAFBFP’s “creative accounting”.

    Petroleum has to be paid for in US$ and no amount of fooling around with numbers is going to change that fact.

    Petroleum products are sold to Barbadian consumers at prices determined by the cost from the supplier and it is from the consumers that Government gets the money to pay the suppliers.

    The Government cannot pay any commercial bank or the Central Bank for US$ any less than the parity rate, for that is the rate those banks acquired it in the first place.

    Simple enough, isn’t it?


  23. @Inkwell

    Thanks for the clarification because we had started to go bonkers thinking that we have missed something. To add to what you stated, successive governments have guaranteed fixed price margins of petrol to the retailers/marketers so that when the price of oil moves above the predetermined threshold price set by government the BNOC carries the cost. This is our understanding but we are open to this position being challenged.


  24. Creative… sure. But it is the CB that issues and manages BDS $. Any agreements that you may be referring to are between the CB and private entities that require US.

    “Petroleum products are sold to Barbadian consumers at prices determined by the cost from the supplier” but it is not “the consumers that Government gets the money to pay the suppliers”… and this is simoply my point. My accounting is out there but some how it is important that Barbadians recognise that it is the productive sectors that pay the bills, and “hat is simple enough”.

    In the instance of managing the need for US to pay TnT, konwing that consumers do not provide this, there has got to be a way to reflect this in accounting as we are dealing with what basically is an inter-governmental transaction between the CB and the BNOC.


  25. @BAFBFP

    We are sorry but we have to let other BU family members take you up on this point. From our reading of the role of a central bank it acts as a settlement bank for government and other players. it means that much of the foreign currency it gets it buys at the published exchange rates.

    If you are saying that that it could sell this foreign exchange at less than the rate it paid and incur a loss what would be the point? They would be transferring the losses from BNOC to Central Bank.

    If this is what you mean we dont agree that it is just a book.


  26. Speaking of no vision, what was interesting were the charges leveled at the government today by Senator Thompson on their handling of the Offshore Oil bid in today’s Sunday Sun.
    ………………………………………………………………
    Timely intervention Observing. I too am at a lost why offshore exploration has been placed on back burner by Thompson administration. The taxpayers spent over $10 million to wrest that maritime space from Trnindad. Maybe the PM knows something we do not. If he does he should disclose it because one of Barbados strengths is successive governments not throwing out the baby with the bath water.

    I voted to kick out the corrupt BLP but their offshore oil hunt specially at this time made compelling economic sense. If what Liz Thompson said is true I would be truly let down by GOB. Over to you David.


  27. If there were no foreign reserves available, the Government of Barbados could set the price of petrol to a Mill $/litre and there still will be no funds available to buy more oil.

    The 180 mil discrepancy is not real debt. Ms Mottley suggested a number of ways that it could be tackled other than taxing the consumers further. I didn’t listen cause I don’ listen to her but I believe in this case she might be making some sense, what ever it is that she said.

    I would keep the price of these essential fluids fixed to consumers (for ever) and limit their use to each consumer to specific annual amounts that are determined by activity type and size of operation. Usage Tracking would be achieved through a system of bar-coding (cars, ID cards etc.) and each service provider would be furnished with laser scanners. Done.


  28. BAFBFP

    …I think that you are carrying this ‘creative’ thing a little too far…

    I like the bit about agreeing with Mia even though you did not listen to what she said…. now THAT is creativity…


  29. Man you fella’s mekkin’ sport ’bout me… I feel bad…!


  30. no – honestly trying to follow your thoughts BAFBFP.
    Normally they are sound…..


  31. I just experienced the worst lightning and thunder since I born. My son was on his laptop and the lightning hit him. He drop laptop and held his hands. Anyway, he is ok now.

  32. political whoredom Avatar
    political whoredom

    Is the debt to BNOC still $180 million? Maybe it was paid off and there is now a surplus! I just wondering in cyber space as the PM drop price of gas twice ostensibly since oil has dropped on world market. What price does BNOC pay for oil and when? It would help if we knew more about their purchasing/pricing structures. I did some asking but was told this info is not available to the public. Why not? and is there anyway of finding out?


  33. political whoredom,

    I had the oppurtunity to ask both Kerry Simms and Liz Thompson and they were both evasive. Lemme tell ya who also wanted to know and couldn’d find out, but who know now but ain’t gun say, Maxine. My accounting is creative but we are dealing with some really grey areas here. Nuff said.

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading