I served as Assistant Secretary of the BLP for a number of years. I am therefore shocked at the front page story in the Sunday Sun for a number of reasons: Miss Mottley was Political Leader of the Barbados Labour Party, and as such would not be in control of the funds of the party. Clause 62 of the Constitution of the BLP states, in part:
The Treasurer shall attend all General Conferences Meetings of THE PARTY and all meetings of the National Council and Executive Committee and shall perform the following duties:
(a) …………..
(b) …………..
(f) Make all disbursements on behalf of THE PARTY including withdrawals from THE PARTY’s bank account on the joint signatures of himself and the Chairman or Vice Chairman. In the absence of the Treasurer one signature should always be that of the Chairman. All disbursement (sic) shall be supported by a voucher certified by the General Secretary and/or Treasurer.

According to the Constitution of the BLP, the Political Leader has no role in the finances of the party, unless that person is also the Chairman of the party. Miss Mottley was never Chairman of the BLP: she should therefore not have been a position to spend the party’s money.
This matter should be referred to the Police

My next concern is how did an internal party-document find its way to the front page of the Sunday Sun?

I have more to say, but I will wait for responses.

Geez David think, think.

@enuff

You maybe surprise at what we know. You need to remove your rose coloured glasses. Lets hope for the sake of you party faithfuls things get resolved soon.

David
What you know or don’t know regarding this situation or any to do with the BLP or DLP really does not bother me. And as I have said before victory at the polls for either party is not my concern at all. I just want people to be consistent in their contributions.

Caswell; You said above;

“Miss Mottley was never Chairman of the BLP: she should therefore not have been (in) a position to spend the party’s money.
This matter should be referred to the Police”.

The Nation article points the finger at Ms. Mottley as being responsible for, or perhaps, authorizing the various expenditures. If she also signed the cheques that would perhaps merit your recommendation that the matter be referred to the police. If she, as leader, merely mandated the authorized signatories to sign the cheques would that be a police matter? Or are you suggesting that it would be a police matter if someone other than the authorized signatories signed the cheques? If so, why would the banks have accepted unauthorized signatures over a 30 month period? If Ms. Mottley signed the cheques could she have legally, even if ultra vires to the BLP constitutional, done so after satisfying the Bank that her signature on the account was valid?

As you realise all the above is pure speculation as I’m waiting with bated breath for this story to unfold.

You also said;
“My next concern is how did an internal party-document find its way to the front page of the Sunday Sun?”.

In my view, it had to be leaked and the only likely leaker was someone in the OSA faction of the party and this is strengthened by reading between the lines of his reported responses in the Nation article. It is very unlikely that it could have been someone from the Mia faction leaking the report.

The purpose of leaking could only have been to do damage to Ms. Mottley’s credibility. It could not have been to mend fences.

Enuff , Tell me why, scout check it, alien
You have a hard job on your hands for the next two years trying to defend your discredited leader. Your entire hypothesis about how he got $75000 on his account doesn’t wash with Bajans.
His strong point is economics and the Barbadian public is not paying him any mind. They are seeing countries all over the world in crisis and little Barbados fighting against the tide to keep its head above the water. Tunisia government over thrown, Egypt is burning and you want Barbadians to believe that the present Government created all of these problems.
Mia Mottley will emerge from all of this way ahead of Owen Arthur, as was demonstrated in St.John when the biggest crowds only turned up when she spoke.
Owen Arthur as a leader should have an investigation on the allegation against George Payne about rigging the electoral process in the BLP because the behavior can be transferred to the national level. If he does not he will even be more discredited.

Thanks Charlie for showing your face.

Please answer this one question. Why did the audit not show up other campaign funds when Owen’s $75,000.00 showed up?

Market Vendor
If my saying that the DLP needs to stop focusing on Owen and Mia and get about doing the people’s business, offended you, I made no apology. The facts are that bajans are reeling under the pressure of overtaxation. Barbados is one of the highest taxed country in this hemisphere. As I’ve said before, if politicians were seriuos of reducing taxes, they would set the example and reduce their salary by 10% and put the opposition on the spot by asking them to do the same. This government gaves school children free bus fare and these children are abusing it, getting in the bus sometimes depriving paying passengers from boarding, now I’m seeing that the Transport Board is crying out for loss in finances. Has the school children stop using the mini-buses and Zr’s ? the answer is NO. People are begging the government to tell them what is happening about the Clico Affair and this government is silent. The new P.M has been in office now officially for three months and has not told us his plan for this country, all he seems to be doing is carrying out the late David Thompson’s mandate, time he stamp his authority. I’m not a party lacky and cannot see where they are going wrong, what I’m saying is that when general elections comes along, don’t expect what happened in St. John will happen all over Barbadods. The DLP needs to stop focussing on Owen and Mia and get do to business, everyday P.M stuart delays is one less day to put his plan for this country to the people. Barbados is still just drifting and if the DLP is careful they can hit the rocks, if Owen gets back God help this country, that man coming back with vengence and blood in his eyes. The DLP is giving him that opportunity. Call me what you like but I say it as I see it.

I was in Haggatt Hall and left that meeting expecting to see some justice done to the nasty underhand deals that occur with politicians, to this day, not a fellow has even been charged farless convicted. Therefore all this blame pointing to the BLP is pure hot air; LOCK UP SOMEBODY or SHUT UP, it’s beginning to get annoying now, you’re turning people off.

@The Scout
Don’t worry about it. Let them continue on this path of distraction sorry I mean destruction. Barbadians already feeling the hardship under the DLP and they also know about the prosperity under Owen Arthur. The general election will be a clear choice between the two and no amount of targeting Owen Arthur will help them. You see people will vote based on their pocket (except for St John they vote on personalities and setiment).
Contrary to what they may think the free education hasn’t been wasted and Barbadian are not as stupid as they may think.
The BLP just have to continue to highlight the mismanagement going on now and not be distracted and the people will do the rest.

@The Scout

All we are doing is giving our opinion about the Arthur/Mottley conflict in the same way we did when Thompson and Mascoll had the same, it does not mean concerns we have about Mia have been forgotten. Rememberer BU, Yardbroom and others warned Mottley that she had a centipede in her bed.

I prefer to spin with today’s issues than become a Columbus like you.

Could you believe Tom Adams died since March 1985 and Hugh still dealing with issues back in the early eighties. This is the nonsense Barbadians are putting up with certain operatives who places smoke screens to divert people from the real world.
Lets deal with issues hovering over Barbados like the campaign cheques that are Missing in Action.
I totally agree with all and sundry that the Owen and Mia issue has the potential to destroy the party. I am extremely angry regarding the press release regarding missing funds which has no criteria. Monies are spent by political parties for various reasons, including promoting the party. Someone seems to have a motive for the release of such a document and it will back-fire. Pelt a rock in the air and must come come down.

I reread the article and the suggestions and points that is being made, the opinions formed by some of you is rediculous. Owen made a stupid statement just before the 2008 elections, when he said he don’t want the DLP to win a single seat in the elections and he was rightly taken to task for that remark. I’ve heard Sincklar say that the BLP don’t deserve to win one seat in Parliament, similar comment, no reaction from public. Both political parties are behaving like little immatured teenage boys trying to get up to a young girl, instead of projecting themselves as the better deal, they try to pull down they opponent. All I’m saying is the DLP has more pride than that of getting into a slugging match with the BLP, if their plan for Barbados is acceptible to barbadians then just ignore the BLP and get on with their job. Less we forget, in the early 90’s elections the people of barbados didn’t vote for the BLP, the voted against the DLP, the same thing can happen again.

The DLP campaign was run out out the FAMILIES FIRST ACCOUNT. I know that for a fact. Every cheque was signed by David Thompson. Also the people behind the Vyz Cartel and Movada concert was FAMILIES FIRST.

So if FAMILIES FIRST was the account for the election which David Thompson alone controlled, tell me who is now responsible for that account with all the millions of the policy holders’ money. Is this account now under the control of Mara as certainly it would be part of Thompson’s estate now?

Leroy Parris leaked that info to David Thompson but looked how he looted CLICO with his own company and he gave Thompson millions for years. During Mia’s no confidence debate, the Bees asked the Thompson and the Dems how much they got from CLICO if Owen got $75000.00, none of them ever answered.

So dont talk about a cheque to Owen. David Thompson is dead, so Mara has to answer about that FAMILIES FIRST account with all of CLICO, SOL and JADA money. David Thompson get all the money and put it in this account which only he controlled.

I heard Johnny Tudor say that he asked for a donation from a business, he dutifully told David Thompson, he made the arrangements to pick up the cheque on a particular day. When he got there, the donor told him that David Thompson had just picked up the cheque. The treasurer of the DLP told him that the cheque was never turned into the DLP.

@Apollo

The issue here is that there is evidence in the public domain about the 75 thousand dollar cheque. Not calling you a liar.

David,

Dont you think that to be fair, you should also find out how much went into FAMILIES FIRST account from the coffers of CLICO, SOL and JADA before hanging Owen Arthur.

It is a known fact that David Thompson alone operated this account and that they had so much money that they flooded Deacons Farm and the Pine with money. They also had enough to go shopping in Miami for clothes to look the part.

My point is that all of them live in glass houses.

The DLP believes that Owen Arthur is weaken by the lost of the St. John by election so they are going in for the kill so the attacks on him have increase considerably. So you have an issue about a cheque that was fully ventilated last election now resurfacing. The problem with that strategy is that the DLP has brought very little to the table to improve the lives of the people in Barbados. In fact people are poorer than they were 3 years ago. Furthermore they have not solved any of the pressing issues that they campaigned on in the last election. They have not solved the housing problems, the state of affairs at the Hospital, the state of affairs at the Transport board, the cost of living even after borrowing and spending at levels unprecedented in the history of Barbados.
Apart from solving the problems we now have additional ones like crime on the increase, unemployment on the increase and no sign of any turnaround in the economy.
So let them continue with this strategy. It will not work unless it is backed up by tangible benefit to Barbadians and their standard of living and that is not happening in Barbados at this point in time. The people will vote for the tried and tested person who brought us 14 years of prosperity not for the group who promise a lot and delivered very little. Who has blunder over and over in executing even the simple tasks.

One side claiming they had a King and the other side claiming they had a God….I wonder what will be the next title…….Obeah Man?

@Fair and balance

The issue of the cheque may have been fully ventilated but we have not see any change in the regulatory environment that would address the matter if it were to recur and this is 3 years later.

David
@Fair and balance

The issue of the cheque may have been fully ventilated but we have not see any change in the regulatory environment that would address the matter if it were to recur and this is 3 years later.

If indeed the matter what fully ventilated then why bring it up again ??? Should you not then be pressuring the people who know make the legislation to implement law to stop it. Seems you attacking the problem in the wrong direction.

This drivel is hilarious as is Hartley’s pretence that barbados Underground and BFP are not his creatures.
Do not let an election where a DLP green monkey could have beaten the BLP fool you Hartley.
The mood of the country is turning and the critical issues will put the DLP out of office irregardless of who leads the BLP.
David never won in 2008, Owen lost…it is always thus.
The DLP are in the process of losing right now and the vast sums spent on a safe seat show how scared they really are. unless something miraculous happens the DLP will not serve a second term…no matter how many sympathy votes they court. Bajans will feel it in their pockets and vote wth their pockets.
INCREASING TAXATION IN A RECESSION IS INFAMY…meanwhile this inept government continues to borrow and spend…and use a political hack of a Central Bank Governor to effect spin rather than policy.
JOBS ARE BEING LOST EVERY DAY YET THE GOVERNMENT ONLY GIVES WORK TO THE BIG BOYS LIKE JADA AND PRECONCO WHO HAVE MECHANISED SO AS NOT TO EMPLOY MORE BARBADIANS.
Both the Minister of Labour and The Central Bank Governor reported on one weekend that more jobs would be lost this year. This did this in a blase fashion without much care for the families it appeared. Yet when the BLP ran an ad pointing out this, the Governor recanted and magiced up a 2% growth in the first Quarter – Does anyone believe this was anything other than politicing and false promise?
FREUNDEL IS NOT RUNNING THIS COUNTRY OR THE DLP, HARTLEY DOES.
This election clearly showed us that. Are we happy that a man of Hartley’s dubious reputation has so much power. How long before his “Legacy” people Sinckler or Mara oust Freundel? Bets anyone?
HEALTHCARE IS A MESS UNDER THE DLP
The biggest joke, other than the Minister of Health himself, is Donville’s electioneering that work would start by March 15th on the polyclinic…who will be building this…Sparman?
NO CANDIDATE IS UNTOUCHABLE IN MODERN DEMOCRACY
Hartley’s attempt to insulate Mara while 5 and 10 man Jada Lashley attacked the BLP candidate was destined to fail. She was attacked as a candidate should expect. this does not make Owen misogynist, just modern politics. Mara will receive more of this the higher she climbs at Hartley’s behest. Nothing personal, just business as usual.
CLICO
Mara bought a house in Martins Bay with Leroy Parris’ wife for $800,000 cash. Maybe she should declare her assets so we can see how much she and David benefitted from the Nation’s loss due to CLICO’s political patronage and the purchase of the 2008 election? CLICO is still to be resolved. Watch for the sting in the tail.

Keep spinning Hartley, the electorate will soon realise that spin can’t run a country.

@anthony

BU has taken the decision to use the cheque to highlight the need for campaign finance legislation. It is a symbol which sends the message. If there are other cheques out there let us have them.

This is the opportunity to remind some living on Mars that the world is grip in a recession

Of course there other cheques but i don’t think we will ever see any others till Prevention of Corruption Bill ( Chapter 17) comes into force. For that to come into force you need to send a constant message to government that they need to enact it. You aren’t by holding an issue a cheque that was shown to be innocent and constantly casting the misuse of funds on it. One wouldn’t hold circumstantial evidence against a man released from a murder charge when proven innocent. Why are you doing such continually ?

@David

In light of Peter Wickham’s opinons in the following article do you believe that Owen is realizing his political death could be nearing, that he has decided to take Mia along with him? If so will the party that is made of the finest steal be saved by his “desperate” attempt as he say, “to save it?”

“By Peter Wickham | Sun, January 30, 2011 – 12:00 AM
In the aftermath of all elections we can expect to witness political nativities, as well as obituaries.

The St John by-election is no different. Last week’s article attempted to speak to the former aspect of the outcome as it relates to the new MP for St John.

Ironically the latter aspect does speak to her political adversary in that battle since one assumes that the Barbados Labour Party (BLP) did not consider his political future to be particularly bright in the first place.

Instead, the political character that appears most scarred as a result of this political excursion is the politically “reconditioned” leader of the BLP, who has no one but himself to blame for this state of affairs that will undoubtedly damage his legacy irreparably.

This type of cynicism regarding Owen Arthur’s performance should not surprise readers who follow my writings and note the extent to which I am consistent (and genuine) in my critique of Arthur’s more recent machinations.

Certainly, I considered it unwise for the BLP to have restored him at this time since I fundamentally believe he is a “spent force”, and some might recall the most recent CADRES report which, in my opinion, provided some amount of statistical support for these arguments.

I noted with some dismay the contrary views of Dr Tennyson Joseph who argued that Arthur’s irrelevance could be transitory, as was the irrelevance of Sir John Compton in St Lucia whom the people of St Lucia resurrected (politically) in 2005.

It is noteworthy that Dr Joseph is himself a politician and this might explain his failure to appreciate the evidence that suggests that both of these gentlemen (Arthur and Compton) made colossal mistakes when they sought to rise again politically.

Collateral damage

In the case of Arthur it is now clear that there is considerable collateral damage that was caused, not only by the fact that he resumed leadership of the BLP, but also by the manner in which he approached that task.

A detailed analysis of the St John election data will confirm this, but it seems as though Arthur has offended the women in that constituency and those within the BLP appeared to have stayed home in larger numbers than normal.

Arthur would do well to remember that in Barbados (as elsewhere in the region) there are on average three per cent more women than men in every constituency, and moreover the voter turnout is almost ten per cent higher among women.

Since several of the constituencies are won or loss by less than five per cent it is clear that the support of women is something that every serious politician should cherish.

Ironically the wrath of women will perhaps not cost Arthur his seat, but could impact negatively on some of his most supportive colleagues who won their seats by very slight majorities.

At the national level Arthur appears to have locked himself into a ripe political “pickle” since he has now lost his second election to the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) and is therefore psychologically wounded as he prepares for the third in less than two years.

He cannot realistically attempt to hand the leadership back since it would appear as though he is now running from a battle that he initially wanted to fight.

Tough image

He also cannot seek to placate those that he offended since we are all aware of his motives and this would make him appear less genuine, in addition to damaging his “tough” image.

Arthur’s best hope therefore would be for those whom he offended to publicly embrace him and join the assault against the DLP in a way that is both meaningful and consistent with Arthur’s style which would indicate that he was correct. This is, of course, unlikely, and leads one to the conclusion that Arthur is politically “looking down the barrel of a gun”.

In every political scenario there are always strategic options and for Arthur his best strategy would be to return to his old “playbook” which is exactly what President Bill Clinton did when he sought re-election.

Arthur has two distinct sides to his political personality and it is convenient that we love one as intensely as we dislike the other. On the “good” side he has the capacity to draw people to him, especially because of his capacity to inspire confidence and, uncannily, the ability to identify political nomads and give them domicile.

On the flipside there is the nasty temper, along with a tendency to appear uncharitable in instances where most of us think that politics should give way to other more noble considerations. In the past, Arthur has skilfully managed both of these sides of his political personality presenting each where and when necessary.

Less flattering side

In instances where we saw the less flattering side, he has been quick to say “I’m sorry” and “I am not perfect” which are phrases that few politicians utter but are extremely effective in disarming adversaries.

One assumes that Arthur’s handlers understand how effective this approach has been in the past and might effectively adopt these methods and breathe life (albeit temporarily) into a political legacy that appears to be failing fast.

If this strategy does not work and the DLP does not self-destruct over the next two years, then it looks as though Arthur would exit politics in 2013 after sustaining a series of political body blows which even his most ardent critics would agree is unfortunate for a man who has redefined the political history of this country in so many positive ways.

Peter W. Wickham (peter.wickham@caribsurf.com) is a political consultant and a director of Caribbean Development Research Services (CADRES).