Banner promoting anonymous crime reporting with a phone and contact number 1 800 TIPS (8477), featuring the Crime Stoppers logo and a QR code for submitting tips.

← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

Minister of Finance Chris Sinckler will deliver his first budget

A recent KPMG’s Individual Income Tax and Social Security Rate Survey 2010 Report exposes a reversal in a global seven year trend of decline in top personal income tax rates. Barbados was not part of the sample group of countries used in the survey but there is enough food for though tossed-up by the survey’s findings. Of interest in the survey is a review of social security contributions when combined with individual taxes collected.

Barbados along with many countries across the globe (developed and developing)continue to battle the issue of how to effectively allocate dwindling national resources in the face of a protracted global economic slowdown. Managing an economy which is dependant on tourism, offshore sector, inflows from remittances and foreign direct investment makes the task more difficult compared to other economies which own natural resources and are export oriented.

The recent announcement by the government to present the budget on Monday (22 November 2010) will be followed by all and sundry with a heightened interest for several reasons.

In the prevailing environment where countries have been running cap in hand to the international financial agencies, Barbados has resisted, but it has come at a price. The expanding deficit as a result of government’s policy of building a social safety nets while maintaining our army of occupation in central government and statutory corporations, has been reflected in a higher deficit than desirable. To be expected credit rating agencies have not reacted well to the current state of affairs and Barbados has suffered the indignity of a downgrade in our sovereign rating. One peg above junk status.

The budget will be presented by rookie Minister of Finance Christopher Sinckler. He will have to face off against former Prime Minster Owen Arthur who is an economist by training and was at the helm of government during the boom years. For many Barbadians there is a warm feeling which comes from the memory of the BLP years in government. Sinckler’s unenviable job to present what will have to be an austere budget will challenge the most loyal DLP supporter in the prevailing economic circumstances. His political stock is sure to rise or fall after Tuesday night.

Early in 2010 the embattled former Minister of Economic Affairs David Estwick went public with the view “the economic situation in Barbados is so bad that there is need for a wage freeze and the sale of state assets to help Dr. David Estwick the government ride out the situation.” Subsequent statements by Late Prime Minister David Thompson appear to distance himself from Estwick. His subsequent transfer to the Ministry of Agriculture confirmed what was leaked into the public domain, key stakeholders in government were (are?) not singing from the same song sheet on the appropriate economic policy to implement. Sinckler was anointed by late Prime Minister David Thompson and his economic pronouncements are likely to conflict with those held by Estwick. Of interest will be to what extent Prime Minister Fruendel Stuart has exerted a contrary view on the compilation of the budget now that he has the full reins of government. Only then will the public get a sense of whether David Estwick will assume greater influence in the financial decision making of a future Stuart cabinet.

On the other side of the divide independents will be listening to Arthur carefully to discern whether he offers an economic prescription relevant to the unprecedented times at hand. Some will evaluate how Mia Mottley, Cynthia Forde and Rawle Eastmond have assimilated into the Arthur regime.  How quickly Arthur can give the appearance his team is a cohesive group two years from a constitutionally due election becomes critical if the BLP wants to be taken seriously as the government in waiting.

Will Barbadians see a government continuing to implement Thompson’s economic plan? Will we see Fruendel Stuart emerge as the Aristotle of his time? Appropriate given his penchant for the classics.  It is noteworthy Aristotle is believed to be the one who discovered logic, a desirable characteristic to possess in troubled times.


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.


  1. Is there agreement if the government does not reduce the deficit now the IMF will make us do it using more draconian fixes all the while our sovereign credit rating will drop to junk?


  2. A friend of my just called and told me the following:-

    “He forgot something else that is going up……………CRIME”

    I thought that very funny and should share it with my friends here tonight. I dont agree of course.


  3. Increasing VAT will have a sigificant impact on the cost of living especially food. Most supermarkets are air-conditioned therefore the direct overheads increased. All supermarkets use BICO cold storage increased cost there again. Excise tax on fuel gone up all vehicles transporting food use fuel costs gone up again. VAT on the fuel increased cost gone up further. Supermarkets use telephone and internet services VAT increased in these services too therefore another increase for th0se in the food business.
    The fish industry costs will increase too because VAT and Excise taxes on fuel.


  4. While the increase in VAT was necessary, I am also concerned of the removal of allowances on employees, approx $450 / month, not taking into account VAT nor investment funds, literally $450 per month is a lot to bear for an individual / family.

    That was not thought out. That is money that will now be kept from restaurant spending, carwashers, house help, charitable contributions etc., because the household books still have to balance.

    Further, what does the reference to the allowances in the current income year mean, surely not retroactive for 2010, thus will be refused in the December 2010 returns, which it seems to say?

    Along with the VAT, some expenditure cuts would have been logical. Thus, while some correct steps were taken, some errors were made.

    Due to these additional steps taken other than VAT and bus fares, which would seem unnecessary and negative, it could be that the pressure from outside agencies is already being brought to bear and is coming to light in this budget.


  5. Yes david thats real frighten possibility in this situation


  6. How are you going the stimulate the economy when you have reduce some persons disposable salary by almost 25% by removing allowances . When my salary is reduced by five or six hundred dollars, my mortgage /rent is the same , car payment the same, utilities increase, food prices will soar where am I going to get money to spend on “luxury” in order to help stimulate the economy. Spending on what luxury I would be lucky if I can still afford the meeting turns next year to pay the car and house insurance.


  7. allowance removal start from next year crusoe


  8. To clarify, I mean ‘Due to these steps taken other than the expected increase in VAT and bus fares, additional steps which would seem unnecessary and negative, it could be that the pressure from outside agencies is already being brought to bear and is coming to light in this budget.’

    Mark my words, someone has laid down the law, otherwise no reasonable person would have also increased the excise tax on fuel and gone even further by effectively also hitting personal tax by removal of allowances.

    Harsh. Overseas agaencies laid down the law, it seems.


  9. Anthony, thanks.

    Watching, you have a very valid point. The only thing I can surmise is that pressure is strong. But you are right, it still makes little sense to add the effect on personal income tax to the increase in VAT etc.


  10. One more question, as I was unavailable to hear the budget. Will Government Ministers / Parliamentarians still retain their entertainment and travel allowances??

    Is the pain shared or will it be just private citizens feeling it?


  11. I heard a number on capital works projects coming on board in Jan and Feb where is the finance for these coming from ? I might have missed that information. But if these are starting within a month’s time means the money is already secured. Is the bank loan that NHC secured from FCIB for forty million being used to finance all these projects?


  12. Crusoe as with most thing i think they left themselve out of that.

    Watching i would assume so too.


  13. Kissmya is watching and reading, analysing amd deciphering. Not impressed with what little content I have heard because what I have heard so far will result in an increase in the cost of living. This is WRONG !!! ; THIS IS NOT WHAT WE NEED NOW !


  14. Everyone calm down and stop complaining remember the DLP said vote for change and you all went with that. Never for one moment stopping to ask what kind of change. You now have a government that you wanted. They gave school children the privilege to ride free on the Transport Board buses and they still catch the mini buses now they come back and say the Transport Board needs to make money so they have to raise bus fares. Idiots! Raise liquor licenses then lower them. Idiots! Criticize VAT then increase it. Idiots! This is the government that you wanted so go to bed and lets see what a real Economist has to say Tomorrow.


  15. @ Crusoe

    I think you may be mis-interpreting. The allowances are not removed. It is their “tax free status”. In other countries these allowances are all taxable benefits. It is time Bajans join the program. How would Bajan restaurant and hotel workers like to have their tips taxed? And if they do not declare tips, the Taxman will estimate the amount of tips received and then fine you for withholding income. Welcome to First World.


  16. @ Ace of Spades

    Very harsh, very harsh indeed. What happen to projects like:-

    1. New CXC Building by NIS
    2. New BWA Headoffice
    3. Sherbourne Redevelopment
    4. Lodge School
    5. School Meals
    6. Housing in the City
    7. New Cruise Pier at Port
    8. Pierhead Project
    9. Needhams Lands Clean-Up Project
    10. Branded Hotels
    11. BTI Tourism Masterplan
    12. Harrison’s Point Hotel
    13. Sam Lords Hotel
    14. Bushy Park Housing


  17. This is in response to the decision to limit the amount of time that government intends to subsidize UWI education. From my understanding, which may be flawed since I was unable to hear this portion of the speech firsthand, government is only willing to pay for a maximum of 4 years. These are my concerns as a working student. Before anyone says that if you are working you should be able to pay for tuition, this is my rebuttal, many persons who work and study do so out of necessity, I doubt anyone would willingly choose to go through the stress of balancing work, life and school if they could go full time and focus on just that. The reason why people work and study is that their household cannot survive without the revenue and in many cases even with that revenue they are barely making ends meet and surely cannot set aside an additional three of four thousand dollars every semester for fees. The following are my concerns with the decision:

    1. I can understand where government is coming from since I honestly think that many students in UWI waste time. However, there is a significant difference between a full-time student, I consider this to be the student who is unemployed and can afford to carry a full course load of at least 4 subjects, and a working student, who must balance doing an 8 hour work day and then do classes on evenings. Surely government must understand that sometimes it just isn’t possible for a working student to carry a subject load which will allow him to finish within this 4 year period. Therefore, I hope that government intends to crack down on the students who are doing 1 or 2 subjects a semester, and i have known some full-time students who have done this, and those who just are unable to do more than 2 subjects.

    2. In the event that government does intend to drop the proverbial hammer across the board on all students, what is to be done so that working students can make the most of the 4 years we are to be given. Is anything going to be done to address the fact that past the level 1/first year courses, it is increasingly difficult to find classes which fall after working hours? Additionally, since I am a government worker, there is a stipulation in the General Orders, which allow for a maximum of 6 hours per week with no more than 3 hours in any single day to attend classes. When I have a class at 10 in the morning until 12 that’s 3 hours there if you take half hour travelling in either direction. Now let’s say I have another course for which I must also take time, there goes my 6 hours. Now, in order for me to get out in 4 years I should be doing 3 or 4 courses per semester. Now, for every hour taken from work to go to class, it must be replaced under supervision or verification from authority. Therefore, 6 hours have already been taken out from any time I can go to that third class on evenings. Generally speaking, for there to be supervision, there must be a supervisor, and in some cases there are some supervisors who will be willing to work with their workers but what about the others who head for home at 4:30. I have not even gone into the fact that those are 6 hours for lectures, not factoring into account an additional 2 hours for tutorials and 3 hours each for the third and fourth course. My point here is that you can’t expect people to do things in a limited time when there are no provisions for giving them that time. I will not even go into what persons working in private have to endure.

    3. Working students actually make a contribution towards their education, in the form of taxes. What provisions will be made to allow us to claim back what we pay in the form of allowances? This situation in my mind is tantamount to punishing workers for having to work.

    There are many other issues I have with this decision and the budget on a whole but to address those would take pages and pages. I surely don’t want to do that and I know nobody wants to read that either. I welcome any of the persons privy to the inner workings of this decision or even Minister Sinckler if he reads this blog to clarify any of the issues I have posted.


  18. “reduced retail liquor licences from $1 000 to $500 with immediate effect ”

    So with all this additional burden of taxation he is devilish enough to encourage people to drink away their financial woes?

    Chris Sinckler are you driving me to drink rum now to deaden de pain?

    Ahmmm… when is de next election date?


  19. Pat, no I mean will they retain theirs, knowing that this udget is to address serious fiscal issues. Or at the least, will their allowances also be taxable or remain tax free???

    I fully expect that all Government air travel will be curtailed as much as possible, minimum numbers travelling, when necessary and definitely NO first class travel.

    After all, this is a serious issue we are dealing with, as evidenced by the budget.

    Obviously, as good ctizens we should monitor this.


  20. Thinking about this further, I am confident that the VAT move was right, the fuel excise is going to cause inflation but is not illogical per se, if the intent is to cut spending on fuel and thus reduce the fuel import bill.

    The removal of personal allowances and thus an effective increase in personal direct taxation on middle class workers for private business is unnecessary and counterproductive, especially in a recession.

    The intent should be to leave disposable income intact.

    One error, may seem small in the budget, but is large in reality. Taking cash out of the pockets of those who already foot most of the tax bill…not a smart move.

    Unfortunately, this one move on direct taxes could shift the election balance twoards the Opposition.

    Just what I said above about piddle moves.

    Instead I would have given committments on Government spending…specific but significant.

    Ah well….a word to the wise should have been enough. Que Sera.


  21. The removal of the travel and entertainment allowance will be a problem. Many companies use this as salary support. In other words many who get this allowance do not engage in travel and entertainment at all.


  22. There were portions of the budget that I think was necessary, like raised busfares and there had to be other draconian measure that had to be made to put this country back on track. However, it seems like the government is blaming the populace for the position the government is in. I have heard no sacrifice being made by the government members, especially the ministers, still lavished living, posh vehicles, first class travel, tax free allowances; do as I say but not as I do. Bajan will only see what the impact on their style of living will have, in a few months, so I advise them to start tightening their belts NOW. For the christmas period, reduce the spending, shop cautiously, buy only what is needed and not what is wanted.
    Mr Sinckler
    Bajans would be better able to absorb the austerity measures if your government MP’s had set the standard by taking a salary cut, then we would know you are serious, don’t punish me for things that both the BLP and DLP did, or are you punishing us for voting for the BLP for three terms. That is vindictive.


  23. Negroman
    I’m waiting for your response to the budget, since you are more loyal to the party than I am, you can show me where I’m wrong in my limited judgement. Bro I hope that Mr Sinckler has lived up to your expectations. For me I give him a B- pass. I thought he did reasonably good for a new comer under difficult situations.


  24. @ Crusoe, you hit the nail on the head, this budget will surely marganalise the middle class of this country. the people who have borne the brunt of the recession burden.

    The Value added tax increase will impact negatively on the Tourism sector, particularly those businesses such as car rental and attractions which some ( without knowledge) consider to be overpriced.

    And what about The CLICO issue,

    Score for the Minister of Finance D- go to the back of the class.

    We await Owen’s reply

  25. Carson C. Cadogan Avatar
    Carson C. Cadogan

    Well it had to happen!

    We were encouraged to live beyond our means for almost two decades by the Barbados Labour Party. Champagne tastes with mauby pockets.

    The privious Barbados Labour Party Government borrowed and spent like tommorow would never come. They were not even as wise as the ants who always stow away a little something for a rainny day, and that was in times of plenty.

    Now it is payback time and we do not like what we see.

    A prison we were told in the beginning would cost $100 million is now costing $700 million, South Coast Sewage Project original estimate was $19 million, completed cost was $80 million. The Barbados Hilton Hotel was originally estimated to cost $170 million final cost was around $212 million not including the law suit which resulted form its completion. The Airport renovations originaly estimated to cost $139 million, final cost $155 million. This was the pattern of every project started and completed by the Barbados Labour Party.

    I have not even mentioned Cricket World Cup. A complete fiasco. An ackee tree was cut down costing $11,000.00. I could go on and on but you get the picture. We all know, with the exception of the Barbados Labour Party, that every action has an equal and opposite reaction.

    Then they was the corruption on a huge scale. Former Ministers with large secret overseas bank accounts. Former Ministers with material possestions far greater than their salaries could purchase.

    Put all together and we had a recipe for disaster somewhere down the road!


  26. Interesting comments. One thing I haven’t seen so far is how the Budget intends to deal with the committments given to the OECS countries by the late PM to underwrite their CLICO losses, especially re. the EFPA’s as well as the local committments. As far as I recall those committments could be near 1/3 billion dollars bds.

    Is the new Government reneging on those committments?

    Also, I do not quite understand how the budget addresses the statements that it is a growth budget and that it is designed to restructure the economy.

    Can any of the economists educate us on this?

    Bajan Panday was right to some extent. This budget seems to be designed as the first phase of an election budget. Some bitter medicine after christmas, then a 2011/2012 budget lessening the harsh measures, then elections.

    In the meantime all of us will have to tighten our belts. The middle class will cut back on non-essentials like home help, eating out, etc. and ride it out. The small people will suffer almost indiscriminately. I wonder how a lot of small and big businesses will manage in the face of the general population hunkering down.

    I still wonder, if the implied inability of the Minister to deal with Government expenditures and to deal primarily with revenues will be adequate to assuage the Standard and Poors and Moody’s and the IMF’s of this world?


  27. Direct funds (to the allowable deductible limit where possible) to RRSP’s or Company Pension plans.

    Under the $10k, if a person invested that and also took advantage of Bonus deductible then you were having situations where disposable income was being tied up to a limit of say $17,500 a year for 5 years. This was money not curculating into local businesses and stores large portions were being invested outside by fund companies. Yes, we all will end up paying tax on these sums now but hopefully we will also spend in the economy what we have been putting down for 5 year periods.

    Was there a value to those funds beyond the tax breaks at this time? Other than seeing it as a savings avenue it’s value was being eroded by financial institutions only willing to take 60% of the value as security against loans if you tried to use it in these times to advance yourself.

    Credit Unions. How can you compare a credit union to a Bank. Credit Unions assets are limited to Barbados. When you compare the likes of say First Caribbean how can you really compare them. So what if BPWCCU bought an asset after competing with other large and foreign owned institutions. Should we not be proud and encouraged by this?

    International banks removed foreign exchange from the island every year with their profits, credit unions don’t as far as I am aware. How can you seriously want to stagnate and compare the growth of the credit unions?


  28. As always carson blames the Bees. never the less there was an increase of net centeral debt of 1.8 billion between end of 2007 and aug 2010 in central bank 9 month revue. somehow whats bad for the bee is good for the dee. they wrote there own mess.


  29. The S&P will look at government inability to cut spending and deal with it harshly if no addition revenues are generates to start reducing current account deficient . the IMF will gladly set some nasty terms to pull the government out of it mess.


  30. The Central Bank reports that for the period Jan to Aug 2010 government expenditure is 165.4 ml less than the period Jan to Aug 2009. Are there any concerns about the impact on growth prospects given how big a part of the economy goverment is?


  31. This sounds a lot like 1991. Well, well, well, when are the elections? I don’t know how much longer I can survive this squeeze without breaking.


  32. I am not sure I can agree with the comments on the effort in terms of reducing transfers and subsidies. Transfers and subsidies are down by 27 ml for the jan to aug 2010 period and some of the budget measures should lead to further reductions:

    1. The new policies in terms of uwi will likely lead to further reductions in the transfer to UWI;
    2. The user fees for the drug service should reduce the transfer to QEH further;
    3. The increased bus fares should reduce the transfer to the Transport Board;
    4. I am watching for the transfer to BWA to see if there is a signficant reduction in the future given the increase in water rates.


  33. Justin Robinson re your November 23, 2010 at 11:20 AM post;

    Thanks for your post above. It seems to imply that there really is not much scope for increased expenditure control now as the Minister of Finance has essentially indicated.

    But, re. the effect of that serious control on growth of the whole economy. I can only guess. I think you and other economists should be able to give us some likely answers to this important question.

    Back to you and your colleagues, Sir.


  34. @David | November 23, 2010 at 7:02 AM | The removal of the travel and entertainment allowance will be a problem. Many companies use this as salary support. In other words many who get this allowance do not engage in travel and entertainment at all.
    ————————————
    Travel and entertainment allowances have not been removed. They were tax-free before, and now they will be taxed.


  35. I am not happy with the removal of the allowances. I see two things behind the measures:

    1. An attempt to have all social groups share some of the pain;
    2. Maybe also an element of overkill to ensure that the government will not need to come back to the public with further measures to fix the deficit;


  36. @ Annonymous

    ….Which means that you will pay more tax…


  37. The opposition leader summarised part of the dilemma confronting the new Minister of Finance in his maiden budget. The opposition leader said in a speech in the Bahamas ” that in these economic circumstances the region would have to pursue policies to reduce expenditure, which could in turn deflate the economy. While to offset the worst effects of global recession, stimulation of the economy by fiscal and other tools was necessary. As he quite rightly said “No easy answer can or has been found to such a dilemma.”

    Has the Minsister of Finance struck a decent balance between plugging the gaping hole in public finance, while trying to stimulate the economy?

    I think on balance he has, while I do disagree with individual measures.


  38. Anonymous re. your post @ November 23, 2010 at 11:38 AM;

    It seems that the Travel and Entertainment tax allowances have been indeed removed. Government cannot mandate that private sector businesses remove any Travel and Entertainment allowances which they give to some of their employees. However, they can remove such allowances which they give to their own employees. I am not clear that the statement excludes this.

    Will Government continue to pay its senior staff their customary Travel and Entertainment allowances even though they will have to pay taxes on it? Such Government employees include Members of Parliament, Permanent Secretaries and Heads of Departments and their deputies and the top staff in the various statutory agencies.


  39. @Black Cow | November 23, 2010 at 4:40 AM | “reduced retail liquor licences from $1 000 to $500 with immediate effect ”
    So with all this additional burden of taxation he is devilish enough to encourage people to drink away their financial woes?
    Chris Sinckler are you driving me to drink rum now to deaden de pain?
    —————————————
    I fail to see how reducing liquor licenses for places that sell alcohol could be encouraging anybody to drink. That’s a stupid statement.


  40. @ Checkit -out
    The budget has not “removed” the entertainment and travel allowances. It has simply caused them to no longer to be tax exempt. Personal emoluments in both the Govt & private enterprises will remain as previously stated in the terms of employment.


  41. My understanding is that the allowances can still be paid but they will no longer be tax free.


  42. Justin Robinson, re your post of Nov 23, 2010 at 11:50 AM;

    You said “Has the Minsister of Finance struck a decent balance between plugging the gaping hole in public finance, while trying to stimulate the economy? I think on balance he has……”

    Could you briefly state what new, innovative measures he has taken to stimulate and restructure the economy? I am really trying to see, arguably accepting that the BLP did nothing to restructure the economy in its 14 years in office, what the DLP is now doing in this regard as was stressed in the preamble to the budget.


  43. Almost any Budget can be critised, that does not mean the critic is right. Tomorrow, criticism will be levelled at Minister of Finance Chris Sinckler – that is par for the course. It will take the order of: you should have done this or that, there are many other ways of relieving the tax burden etc. And will play to specific sections of the community.

    However, a pragmatist will look at Government income and expenditure, has measures been taken to reduce the Govt deficit. Were measures taken to stimulate the market, for our major foreign currency earner – tourism – was the money earmarked for such activity, done with due “prudence”.

    We talk a lot of our own food production, was any help given to farmers. . . never enough, but was help given.

    Mini bus drivers and others have complained about their fare structure. . . saying they have been repeatedly ignored. This has been fundamentally addressed, in return they should act responsibly and operate as requested . . . they have been included in the loop.

    It is a cautious Budget, nothing really draconian, but a positioning for future action, depending on how the economy responds to measures taken.

    No large wave has engulfed us. The captain has decided to “steady” the ship, looking straight ahead, with a quick glance, starboard, port and astern. He believes he can weather this storm, there is no action yet taken, which suggest he cannot.


  44. Some new measures include:

    1. There is reasonably extensive program of capital works which should have some stimulative effect;
    2. The loan guarantee scheme for hotel plant upgrades and 6ml in additional funds for the tourism marketing in the UK.
    3. A number of schemes for alternative energy including a 45ml US facility and a US $10 ml Smart Energy fund.

    4. There is the Productivity and Innovation tax Credit;

    Of course with a number of these measures the devil will be in the pace of implementation.


  45. but the point of them was for them to be tax free and not be part of the salary and push you into another bracket. now that been removed it just more taxes for government since the allowance will now just make up you salary. as for reduction in expediture most of seem to come from captial expenses. so i guess that the 40 million fcib loan had not come thru as yet nor the loan for 120 million for fourseasons.


  46. Yardbroom… you got to be joking man… this budget is a deat blow to the middle class of this country.. remove the blinkers man.


  47. @iWatchya | November 23, 2010 at 11:41 AM | @ Annonymous
    ….Which means that you will pay more tax…
    —————————
    I am not against paying a little more tax because I can bare it, but I’m against the rise in VAT and bus fares because those will seriously affect the poorest people.


  48. as for help for farmer. while they be happy with the reduce water bill there main problem has always been people stealing the crops which should have been addressed.


  49. Justin Robinson re your post of Nov. 23, 2010 at 12:24 PM.

    Thanks! I’ve noted the projects / measures you’ve listed.

    imho. These measures are merely a continuation of the types of measures carried out by all Barbados’ governments in the last 25 years or so and in no way qualify to be accepted as earth shaking, innovative measures that will stimulate and restructure Barbados’ economy.

    In other words, the hype around which the budget was framed has not been supported by the measures contained therein. It is true that this budget at this time might not be the place to provide measures to restructure the economy but the Minister of Finance, in setting up his proposals, clearly gave that impression.

    The Medium term plans also, as far as I am aware, do not do this.


  50. @ Jong Browne

    Yardbroom and others voted for the change they are now receiving so they are too ashamed to criticize the DLP. They have to lump it. The most of the make up of this administration has marginal seats from as little as 30 votes and up and a 1% swing can unseat most of them. Time longer than twine.

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