Continuing to review the document which as we stated presents no surprises:

The lowest rating received by government in the poll is under unemployment and the economy

Barbadians feel the timing of the water hike was off

Mottley’s popularity within the BLP vis a vis Arthur

The performance of the government in a declining economy is interesting. Bear in mind the Opposition scored comparatively high on performance as well.

Will Arthur make a move? In the context of the poll he maybe forced to make a clear the air statement to save Mottley from attack.

Did they ask participants in the poll if the DLP lived up to its promises?

I doubt.

Is it not the DLP’s ploy to create division in the BLP!

How could the particpants in the poll say that the DLP performed better than the BLP when it comes to roads and infrastructure. Bajans got short term memories!!!!

Do tell us who participated in the poll!!

Cuh dear, the hard facts have clearly ruffled Donald’s feathers! Relax nuh, it aint even election time yet!!

Hehe, that’s why Donald in such a flap… like a headless chicken. It gine be bare action in Roebuck Street!

THE SHORT MAN -MAN !!

Everybody feel that this is a one term government. They won an election that they did not expect to win only because some uninformed bajans borned after 1981 wanted change simply because they got tired of seeing Owen , Mia , Wood etc and wanted to see other people.

This reminds me of some ignorant people in the country who would like to see a hurricane.

I’m a bit surprised at the graphic on whether it is a time for change or not. While 43 percent say no, what surprises me is that the “Yes’s” and the “unsure’s” are also 43%.

owing owen making a comeback? big joke. that man looks so frail, a strong wind would blow he away. he looks more like he need of rescuing . he can fool heself . owing time gone. he got to accept it. he better make peace with god and beg for forgiveness because he mess up lot of people. the BLP aint going nowhere with big mamma mia and it aint going to anywhere with the doberman in dentures that is owing affur. the blp got a long time in opposition if the infighting does not break it up for good. the chairs can fly in roebuck street.

Donald, you really sounding like a duck!! Ha ha!

Should have made clear that the threat was in direct relation to publication of the above CADRES poll.

For those like Veitas and WIV who try to respond to Living in Barbados thinking he is sincere,that above post along with most of the others point me in one direction.

Living in Barbados is a shill for the BLP,and is carrying a huge grudge against the DLP because they did not facilitate himwith work,work permit fast enough etc.

To the BU family, could I please ask people of both p9olitical parties to keep their feet on the ground. It would be nice if the BU could respond to this comment.
Peter Wickham was/is a member of the DLP, is on very friendly terms with the PM and is known to be a strong supporter of the government.
Now in this day and age of threats and cancellation of picks, is any sensible Bajan likely to tell him anything that Peter does not want to hear or anything that he is likely to report back to George Street?
Is it not possible that given such facts we should discount the outcome of any Cadres poll?
Let us be frank here, how many governments are more popular at mid-term than at the previous election? Especially when one considers the global recession, the immigration question, the rising rate of unemployment, hike in water rates, failure to publish any kind of integrity legislation and on and on we go.
So please could we not put aside the bogus outcomes of any Cadres poll right now.
Peter Wickham is just what he is, part of the Hartley Henry gang, talking up the DLP in the face of a mountain of domestic problems.

Someone need to remind carol martindale and the other journalists at the Nation of not only the threatening phone calls,but the cussing journalists,business persons and average citizens got – not from a political adviser – but from the then prime minister himself – Owen Arthur.

Almost everyone in Barbados knew how Owen used to call up any one who crossed him ancussed the out,and then try to victimise them.

Very strange that carol martindale and the Nation never made those threatening calls from Owen public.

What about david ellis,,those at CBC and the list goes on.

The Nation newspaper has been totally against this new government when they came in and even when they were in opposition.

Hartley henry worked at the Nation with martindale and the others for years,and probably thought that as former colleagues he can speak his mind to her.

I know that this front page story is another of the Nation’s attempt to discredit the government,along with the negative guyanese stories over the past few months,or the cover up on the in-fighting for the leadership position in the BLP.

Just before the last election the Nation published 2 polls paid for by them,all trying to show Owen in a good light.

That newspaper is nothing but a BLP publication and the Government should get some balls and withdraw all advertising from them.

Hit them where it hurts.

Their readership is declining anyway.

Like a few other things that have come to past, Barbadians will soon come to realize that the Nation is a regional newspaper not worth their subscription.

Since when the Nation is so vanguard for Freedom Of Press? When Harold Hoyte get divorce for having an affair with his own step-daughter everyone went silent; when Owen got divorced as Julie was pregnant for him it was the most quiet break-up ever unlike Bharrat Jagdeo’s split in Guyana… As for their lack of treatment towards Graeme Hall when they could do a constant environmental series on the plight of Bajan nature allowed to deteriorate – hah, steupse! They tell what they’re told to say, maybe they’re growing some tesicles at last?

Nail on the head, Fair Play. Nail on the head! That’s why I said HH played his hand like a novice. He’s given the Nation an ‘excuse’ to hide any bias particularly of the editor in question, by shifting the attention on him. Not the actions of a supposedly seasoned and much sought after political strategist. Tsk tsk.

Remember the DLP promised the following in their manifesto as part of their economic strategy. They said “a Democratic Labour Party Barbados government will give maximum priority to the creation of a macro-economic environment that stresses the following:

 Fiscal prudence in the allocation of expenditure and the absorption of revenues;
 Protection of the fixed exchange rate regime through careful management of the fiscal and external current account deficits;
 A tightly managed debt accumulation strategy targeted at the reduction in both domestic and foreign components of the national debt;
 The attainment of full employment through the private sector’s response to new domestic entrepreneurial and investment opportunities in traditional and more importantly new industrial, cultural and knowledge sectors.”

How much of this have they done?

That was a real faux pas from HH. It seems clear that he did not discuss it with Thompson before he acted, but in politics impressions count more than truth, and you can be sure the BLP will milk this for all it was worth. HH’s position may have become untenable, even if OSA used to do worse. The difference is, no victim spoke out publicly.

Donald Duck, Esq, stop the copy and paste we all have the above in print getting dusty so please tell us something that we do not already know.

@Themis

Really surprised at you response. Do you know the facts in this case?

As a previous comment hinted HH would have worked with this person making the accusation for sometime. Our sources paint an entirely different story of the matter, we will have more to write on this later and it will not be complimentary of the Nation newspaper. There is an approach used by governments over the years to ensure stories which show favour get into the media. Let us hasten to add BU does not condone threats as described by the Nation report on its FrontPage.

There is a question to be asked, why a poll result released by one of the region’s leading pollsters would not be carried by the leading newspaper in Barbados on its FrontPage?.

We in the PDC have said it many times before in many areas of country – though perhaps NOT as many times as we ought to on this BU Blogsite – how this type of political polling by CADRES and Mr. Peter Wickham, how the commissioning of such polls by whomsoever, and the publishing of such findings of this type of political polling by sections of the media, are on the whole grave and fundamental violations of the democratic constitutional legal principles of the right of the people of Barbados, in general, and the Electoral and Boundaries Commission, in particular, to participate in and to ensure that there is conducted free and fair elections in this country.

It is demonstrably clear that whenever this type of polling by CADRES and Mr. Peter Wickham is done and the so-called findings published or released by say, he himself the so-called political pollster, or the Nation Newspaper, to the public of Barbados, it is done, et al, with intent to and or recklessly to unduly, unfairly, wrongfully influence the minds of many thousands of potential voters in this country as to who to VOTE for or NOT TO VOTE for in any type of election, or even whether to VOTE or NOT TO VOTE OVERALL; and done with the intent to and or recklessly to unduly, unfairly, wrongfully cultivate in the minds of thousands of potential voters hitherto un-thinkable or inconceivable VOTER perceptions or attitudes about particular political personalities or candidates or parties at given times in this country.

By calling these polls scientific, the intention of the pollster or polling agency is esp. to get the average reader or the average listener who would observe some particular findings of these particular polls in the media but who would vote or NOT in an election ahead, to believe that what the polling agency or the pollster or what the media house is publishing concerning these so-called findings in polls, is true or probably true, based on the implementation of valid and sound scientific statistical research methods, or the average potential voter who would read or listen in the relevant media to particular findings of these political polls, to believe that what the agency, pollster or media house is promulgating – as so-called findings – is true based on the said implementation of valid and sound scientific statistical research methods.

But whether or NOT this is so, such political gangsterism is totally unacceptable and horrendous as that potential VOTERS/VOTERS in Barbados must – as much as possible – and as freely and as fairly as possible be allowed to make up their minds on which candidate or which party to vote for, minus being unduly unfairly influenced by many aspects that fall within the parameters of political polling, e.g. whether a person is thought to be best suited to be Prime Minister, or whether a party is thought best fit to help lead this country; and, too, parties and independent candidates and others must – as much as possible – and as freely and as fairly as possible be allowed to compete among themselves for the VOTES of VOTERS, without these kinds of obscene and totally unwarranted interventions from pollsters or polling agencies .

What must be made very clear at this juncture is that CADRES, Mr. Peter Wickham, and his cohorts inside and outside of the media must no longer be made to get away “with political murder” in this country by foisting particular so-called or questionable polling findings or results on the political electoral process or on uncritically accepting or unsuspecting people or entities of this country.

Too, it is patently clear that at given times many of these polls are designed to favour or disfavour or to enhance or harm the chances of success or failure, respectively, of particular parties, personalities or even particular ideas in this country. So, therefore, consistent with this kind of argument, those fellow commenters who can, must only ask the Prime Minister what he thinks of the last two pieces of polling by CADRES and Mr. Peter Wickham – in the lead up to the last election – and if they did or did NOTdo much to help his party win the last election? Ask Mr. Clyde Mascoll what type of effect polling by the same CADRES and Mr. Wickham did have, such as to in any way harm his chances of winning back his seat in St. Michael North West Constituency in the last general election? And, ask Dr. Haynes, too, to what extent did polling help to marginalize his party in the lead up to the 1991 and 1994 general elections in this country?

And we in PDC are certain – if they are honest enough – that they would tell you that it was clear that some particular findings of the particular polls did enhance or harm their party’s chances of winning the respective elections or, as in Mascoll’s case of losing his seat!! Or what some fellow commenters on here can do is to – as we have previously done on many occasions – ask many potential voters in Barbados what influence does political polling by CADRES and Mr. Wickham and the publishing of findings in some sections of the media have on their voting intentions?

We are very sure that some of these commenters would be told by some voters that they woud have been influenced to some extent by such polling factors as to who VOTE for, which parties to support or NOT, or whether or NOT to VOTE at all.

Finally, the time has come whereby it must be made clear by the PDC and some others in Barbados that CADRES or, for that matter, any other polling agency operating within the jurisdiction of this country, or that Peter Wickham, or, for that matter, any other so-called pollster operating within the jurisdiction of this country, must be made in the public’s interest and by the properly instituted and enforced laws of this country, to give due respect to the fundamental rights of the people and of the Electoral and Boundaries Commission to ensure that any elections that are conducted in this Barbados must be done so according to highest democratic constitututional lega standards possible and conducted as freely and as fairly as reasonable and possible.

So, just as there have been lectoral laws passed declaring it an offence to campaign on election day in Barbados, or an offence to wear many particular party symbols like buntings etc, in the precincts of a polling station, or just as it is an offence to sell alcoholic beverages on election day, so must there be passed and enforced electoral laws to make it a punishable criminal offence to conduct political polling, and the publishing of findings of political polls within a certain time, say, one year of the time general elections are constitutionally due inthis country, or within reasonable time of a by-election being held (general elections too must become fixed in time as well in Barbados ); and for the duration of time that political polling and the publishing of findings of political polling is allowed so must there be passed and enforced some electoral laws of this country making it a punishable criminal offence for a political polling agency, or political pollster, or a media house or any person, for that matter, to make mention by name or clear suggestion – how a hitherto named and very clearly suggested particular party is thought to be doing in the country at the time, as a finding of a particular poll in the supposed opinion of many people surveyed – say, how a particular named or very suggested person is preferred more than another or others for Prime Minister at a given time, as a so-called finding of a particular poll in the supposed opinion of many people surveyed, etc. In these cases, the law must however make it clear that ONLY As Bs Cs or whatever symbols come up with by polling agency or pollster, can be substituted for the real identities of these entities.

Anyhow it is our intention to – in the not too distant future – file a serious formal complaint with the ELECTORAL and BOUNDARIES COMMISSION about the fact of how our party – the PDC – and so many of its supporters, and how smaller parties and independent candidates are seriously disadvantaged by the type of political polling that is carried out by CADRES and Mr. Peter Wickham and by the publishing of many of these so-called findings by sections of the media, and about how in the process these particular situations are doing irreparable massive harm to democratic norms in Barbados and to the principle of free and fair elections being adhered to in this country and to make sure that these kinds of henious unforgivable situations are in the long run redressed and rectified to the satisfaction of our party and to the people of Barbados .

So, there you have it!!

Down with the Damned DLP and the blasted BLP!!

PDC

Donald Duck, Esq, you and others might have such but not me and my children therefore we all will continue to VOTE to keep the BLP out of office for as long as it takes till they BLP learned they lesson and pay for they wrong doing yes they did it to us Barbadians who were paying them.

Anonymous

Do you agree that the DLP has not lived up to its promises?

There is more to this than meets the eye, these two people were colleagues on the work front and were probably comfortable about expressing their differing views on events to each other. To me this is a personal attack on D Thompson; H Henry is one of his closest advisors so any accusation against Henry is an accusation against Thompson and his personal judgement (or lack thereof).

The whole thing may boil down to a he said/she said story unless there is a recording to back up the allegation or unless the “editor” who was in the vicinity can vouch for the authenticity of the claim. The timing is curious and I also wonder if there is any connection given the BLP’s recent black eye on the unflattering story about Symmonds.

Whatever the out come, the relationship between the DLP & the Nation has been breached – perhaps irrevocably.

BTW Is there a law about threatening to destroy someone’s reputation?