Prime Minister Fruendel Stuart will participate in a televised – CBC TV8 Link – interview tonight (26 April 2011) at 8 o’clock. In recent weeks there has been a lot of discussion about the ‘quieter leadership style’ of Stuart compared to his predecessors. It will be the first time Barbadians get a chance to assess Stuart interacting with members of the local media.
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
well he off to london soon so i don’t think it would be anything major. of course he could throw a spanner in everyone plan and announce a reshuffle.
PM Stuart left for the UK today, its quite posible that the meeting telecasted after tonights news is recorded and not live. I think he will make some tweaks to his Cabinet namely Minister Lowe back to work at the Ministry of the Environment & Water and changes to the Cabinet regarding Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Economic Affairs.
what is this travesty? You people mekkin sport at Bajans yuh!!!
PM Rip Van Winkle on TV.
PM Rip Van Winkle on TV, in his usual fine form, lol.
A rambling bundle of crap……….nothing specific about Barbados justa bunch a general statements stung together by perplexing pauses.
This is refreshing and insightful, at least for the unbiased.
Rose Art
Cah ya krutch. your pappa is Rip Van Winkle. ya pissy rat. blindya.
OK, let’s get past the partisanship and raise some real issues….what have we learnt during/after this interview???
FIRST IMPRESSIONS – Disappointed that the Prime Minister has not exposed himself in A LIVE BROADCAST, and questioned in a fair and balanced way, by a battery of representatives from ALL of the media houses.
“Fondle Stroke” is truly being fondled by Rosemary Alleyne, who very obviously, is one of several hardcore representatives of that DLP stronghold constituency N0. 31, better known as CBC DLP TV. Rosemary is telegraphing her questions, and setting up Stuart nicely so that he can answer in the way most comfortable for him.
Barbados’ current social and economic position certainly does not allow us to be pussy footers now, so why isn’t she asking him some tough questions, like e.g. that multi- million dollar withdrawal by his PAL/BUDDY Leroy Parris, ahead of poor suffering CLICO Policy Holders, who can’t get a single cent?
Mr. Stuart, I am asking you , on your return from the Royal Wedding, to hold a REAL PRESS CONFERENCE.
The only word I can find to describe this right now, up to this point so far is : POOR-RAKEY.
That bajans still look to these politicans for representation and to hear their repetitive vomit is something that amazes me.cant we see who the real puppet master is maybe this trip that the pm and the governer general are taking should open our eyes.can any one hear tell me the origin of the word democracy
If de PM do, he is damned, and if he don’t, he is still damned. WTF.
The interview so far has been very informative.
In fact compared to the traditional press conference information forthcoming has been way more.
Hi Bonny Peppa, somebody once warned Prime Minister Stuart to steadfastly ignore your approaches to get to know him better, casue yuh know … you want every gentleman you see.
He just told Rosemary, in answer to her question about what he does to relax, that ….. “I don’t have the luxury of making love” quoting Bertrand Russell.
Bonny, Ilaro Court must be a big cold house for Stuart, seeing that he is there alone. How about it baby? You must first clean out your mouth though. You can’t go in Ilaro using expletives.
What new information did you gather david.?
Perhaps a question about timelines for the FOIA and Integrity and a stab at pending litigation matters with 3S and Lagan, for the record.
I just watched the interview. The man is an enigma. He is a very nice person. He appears to be very honest. He is intelligent but he made a few gaffes that might come back to haunt him. He did very much better than Sandi when he was asked the question of what is his vision for Barbados. At least he framed the answer better. He essentially, by body language at least, appear to have admitted that Ms Myrie has a case. He confirmed that Dennis Kellman will retain a Ministerial position and there was a lesser suggestion that Dennis Lowe would be welcomed back in May but it was not explicitly stated that he would be welcomed back to the Cabinet. All in all a very interesting interview that laid bare the soul of the Man and is sure to provide fodder for rumour mongering.
But given the interviewer did we expect any hard questions and how it was presented and that it was pre-recorded. did we really expect any hard questions to be asked.
@ David
I must admit I might have been a too quick in my judgement, one of my short coming. A much better ending than beginning and quite forthright even though the questions seems very soft, general and not pointed at all.
@anthony
There was position revealed of cameras at the airport. It will be interesting to read the NUPW’s reaction.
He explained his role in government and touched Kellman.
More importantly he introduced himself to Barbadians in a personal way for the first time.
It is a start.
David, you can’t be serious in your comments on this particular “press conference.”
You trying to be like the other David at VOB? Playing devil’s advocate? Tell me exactly how you have benefitted from this “press conference” and how exactly has your confidence in the political leadership of this country been restored?
@checkit
How did he admit Myrie have a case?
@Truthman Burton
Where was it promoted as a press conference?
The alert BU received described it has an interview.
Based on the recent hyped activity of Denis Kellman (like a man in a great hurry, even planning to build skycraper tower in St.Lucy) and the strong subliminal messages he has sent to all and sundry in the DLP, that, “YOU ALL HAD BETTER TAKE CARE OF ME NOW” Stuart has no alternative but to ensure Kellman is not returned to the back bench.
I dont know what to make of it.
Yes he answered the soft balled questions in a long roundabout way. I learnt that Dennis Kellman is a valued member of the DLP and will not go back to the back bench.
He did not tell the truth about CLICO though, CLICO’s demise had nothing to do with the recession, Duprey admitted that. I am sorry for the people holding those flexible annuities, they seem to have no sympathy from the PM.
He bent the truth a bit with his responsibilities, he has Darcy Boyce, Jepter Physical Deficit Ince and Harry Husbands in his office looking after the portfolios he mentioned, yes he may be the minister but he does not do the work.
Why did I constantly think that I was watching and listening to Sandi!
David ……. “Interview”, “press conference” , whatever you want to call it. Are you really satisfied that we have been properly served through this half-baked encounter with one of his CBC DLP TV minions?
His view that Standford and CLICO were just like everybody else, victims of the global recession, is to bold facedly deny the grossly austentatious lifestyles and evidence of corruption that took place in these companies, on the backs off the clients. Does Mr. Stuart expect us to be this naive?
Truthman Burton
Freundel Stuart isn’t easy. He bowled two bouncers that would be a part of the next general election campaign.
He praised the Jamaican people for hanging together on the allegations very sarcastically but two uppercuts for the unpatriotic behavior of Mia Mottley and Owen Arthur in the Myrie case.
He handled the issues well and he reminded the BLP people that he would give them a shock of their lives if they feel they got cake.
Good beginning now the critics go to find a new line of attack.
@Prodigal Son
As a comparison when Arthur had Joseph Atherley, Glyne Murray and Clyde Mascoll at one time who was doing the work?
@Truthman
Playing a David Ellis here (being provocative) How do you react to his reference to Arthur applauding the company at the opening of its new building?
@David
So what is wrong with Arthur applauding the company when he was invited to open the new building? Were not his comments largely overtaken by subsequent events? Go over by Barbados Free Press’ lengthy threads re: Afra Raymond’s investigative reporting, and evidence the virus of corruption in the mother company. I have said before that it is hard for the Barbados child to escape the mother’s taint.
@Charlie
I don’t recall any unpatriotic behaviour from Mia Mottley nor Owen Arthur in the Myrie affair. I think they both spoke very measuredly and sensibly on the issue. They both expressed concern about the potential for degradation of Barbados’ reputation, due to improper handling of the situation by the present government. What were they to do? Keep silent like Stuart while his Foreign Minister made unwise and precipitate remarks that only threatened to inflame the situation?
On a scale of 1-10, I gave him 6. the questions were very simple but he answered them fairly well. I don’t particularly like his reference of the Sanford/ Clico problems to world recession, everyone knew there were/is much underhand deals in both cases. He lost a few points when he admits that he has no sex life; poor fellow, he must be a most lonely P.M, maybe he should talk to Owen. On a more serious note, even though it wasn’t a great interview/ press conference, it was a start and this is what the people of Barbados was calling for, pity he had to be force into it.
David re. your query of April 26, 2011 at 9:42 PM about the Myrie case.
I said body language above but it was more than that. It was the way he structured his answers about that incident and the impression given that he was covering all bases by only adding “alleged”, almost as an afterthought.
If you recorded the interview it might be useful to put up the section of the interview that dealt with that matter so that people could see it again.
The interview was very instructive as to who Freundel Stuart is. e.g. He had no qualms about referencing Errol Barrow in somewhat negative ways. Similarly, he appeared to be putting the blame on David Thompson for misleading the public that he only had responsibility for Defence and Security in his final cabinet. presumably Stuart didn’t even consider that he (stuart) should have informed the public long ago that both he and David Thompson had other cabinet responsibilities when he took over the PM’s job. It would have silenced critics on that score.
The pedantic way in which he structured his answers and the very soft ball questions that were not in the least probing defined the interview but it gave a number of insights into the character of the man nevertheless.
Truthman Burton
Barbados seems to be on the defensive in this Myrie case, we heard that Jamaica is heading to the CCJ with the case, Jamaicans are kept informed as to the developments in the caes but bajans are kept in the dark. The only information we’re getting on this matter is coming out of Jamaica, therefore if we only hear one side and not the other, then there is the tendency for one to believe only what is said
The Pm would not speak was the call now he has the BLPs cry he said nothing. What do you expect from BLP party faithfuls so accustomed to cringing after Owen Arthur finished speaking for the poor soul that was undressed without opportunity to defend. What a difference than another MInister having to run and hide after Arthur’s presentation. To a man and woman he debased them all from Billie, Payne, Tull and Cheltenham from the old guard to Wood, mia, Thompson, Marshall (Rommel) Eastmond and Goddard when after was done not one of them could face the public. Some withdrew, some disappeared and the rest kissed till they got back in front. and kissed
What Stuarte said? Barbadians have wethered the storm, are not out of it and despite the mess left by the BLP can start to move forward and not one single soul received a cussing and the poor BLP start cussing what a laugh!
This Myrie case is headed to the CCJ, so WTF else is new? stupseeeeeeeeeee.
Truthman
I have no problem with him lying still while I make de love to him as long as he rises ta de occasion when de time arise. LOL. you got problems wid me enterin Illaro Court but dah in gun stop me. you doan tink dat i would get on like de scally-wag dat i am at BU, do ya? gimma lil credit nah. Lawddddddddddd. Anudda noteworthy note, I luv a leff-han man. I could imagin he holin me in dem strong armz n wisperin ‘sweet nuttons’ in me earz? anybody evva do dah ta you yet? I dout. anyway…………….
Nite-nite. my bed shud be dry by now. whet-dreamz doan be eezee a’tall. (LOLLL) tek dah Truthman.
Who is this character Bonny Peppa ?
wait boah ! She sound very crazy crazy.
craziest person I have seen on this site so far.
Yeah ! Freundel Stuart needs to be careful. Is he well ? He seems a bit sicky sicky in a kinda blithey blithey kind of way.
A funny and strange sounding interview but it gave some insight into the man, insight that does not inspire confidence
I watched most of the interview, unfortunately, I gave up when Prime Minister Stuart decided to rehash the misinformation that was fed to him by senior civil servants about the amendments to the Public Service Act. He claimed that he piloted an amendment that would have extended the temporary appointments from 3 to 12 months.
I must admit that he piloted an amendment that purportedly set out to do what he claimed. The only thing is that the Public Service Act NEVER limited temporary appointments to 3 months. The Recruitment and Employment Code which is the First Schedule to the Act details an elaborate set of recruitment principles to be used when employing persons in the Public Service. Prior to the amendments, Paragraph 9 provided for exceptions to those principles if the vacancy was “up to no more than 3 months; and only when such vacancies are being filled from within the Ministry or department; or when employing physically or mentally challenged persons. The explanatory notes said in part, “If there is any possibility that staff may be needed for more than 3 months, or if the vacancy is being filled by external recruitment then the procedures for full, fair and open competition should be used at the outset.
When the Personnel Administration Division gave temporary officers 3 month appointments over and over again for the same job they were breaching the Act.
The amendment to Paragraph 9 merely allows the Public Service Commission to supersede officers and justify its action by saying that the “Commision considers, in the interest of the Public Service, that the appointment is necessary for the effective functioning or good administration of the relevant Ministry or Department”. That amendment effectively eliminated any legitimate ground for an officer to question supersession, and it was not something that the PM should have been proud of.
I am one of those that was saying give the PM a chance to make mistakes, well this is one.
LOL! Fruendel must have taken my call literally of “welcome back to the limelight Fruendel”, of a week ago! Hope he gave a good performance!! 🙂
He was asked about his sex-life?!! I woulda tell d reporter to “mine yuh own business”!!
@Bonny
Who taught you to cuss? I haven’t heard those words since
I was a boy walking through the Greenfields on Roebuck Street. You have brought tears to my eyes with laughter.
@ David
As I said before, I left Barbados too young to vote and after spending my entire working life overseas, it doesn’t matter to me whether the BEES or the DEES are in power. However I must agree with you that compared to the traditional press conference, information forthcoming was more.
@Truthman Burton
So what is wrong with Arthur applauding the company when he was invited to open the new building? Were not his comments largely overtaken by subsequent events? Go over by Barbados Free Press’ lengthy threads re: Afra Raymond’s investigative reporting, and evidence the virus of corruption in the mother company. I have said before that it is hard for the Barbados child to escape the mother’s taint.
Let us be honest about the CLICO matter. If the parent in T&T did not run aground the Barbados operations would be sailing along just fine with Parris at the helm Supervisor of Insurance and all.
We get so political about every thing. Bear in mind when Arthur lauded CLICO the evidence suggests CLICO would have been running short reserve at that time.
My question is if Jamaica intends to go to the CCJ for the Myrie case, how can it do so, if it has not signed on to that court?
Jamaica still recognises the Privy Council as its final court. To go tot he CCJ surely it would first have to bring it to the Barbadian courts, then if lost, appeal to the CCJ as Barbados’s court of final instance?
Or, is there some provision for inter-regional disputes in the CCJ, even so surely Jamaica will still have to recognise that court as having jurisdiction, before it can seek redress in that arena?
Sounds quite unusual.
@Crusoe
It depends, what if they are treating with the matter as a violation of the revised treaty of chaguaramus?
Then it means Jamaica can have the benefit of both worlds, the CCJ and the Privy Council. What if the verdict goes against Jamaica, can they then take it to the Privy Council? How can two regional countries resolve a matter when the last courts of appeal for both countries differ?
The Minister of Transport need to also remind his boss not only the Transport Board…..”To whom much is given, much is required”,….his boss as a former pastor need to be reminded that and perhaps he may stand up and provide this great country with strong leadership…..mmmm…..then again he might.
It has become so clear now, I see Chris becoming the next PM at the soon to be call general elections.
Good bye Pastor Stuart, you have not grasp what it is to be a leader.
Regardless of what Prime Minister Stuart said, or who he was interviewed by, there would have been criticism of him by some; because there are those who believe, he and by extension the DLP Party and Government cannot do right by them.
They have mired themselves into antagonism, agony, and angst, while appealing to anyone who renders them an audience.
Ref the Myrie Case: Taken to the CCJ.
Jamaica has not signed up to the CCJ, they could easily ignore any judgement given as they are not bound by it. It seems rather strange, that a Court to which their Prime Minister – Bruce Golding – is alleged to have said, they would have to have an input in the composition of its judges before cases are heard, now seeking to use that court for jurisdiction in the first instance….all very strange.
Jamaica’s Character of Rights Debate in Parliament referencing CCJ.
“In his contribution to the debate, Golding said his Government was “not yet satisfied that in doing so (dispensing with the Privy Council ) we must take out a final court which is an external entity over which we do not have control as a state to replace it with something else whose existence and continued existence is not within our gift”. Jamaica Gleaner December 22, 2010.
Consistency of argument has evaded some of us, as we seek to score political points, instead of listening to what is being said. Must we always move around with a burdensome carapace of political dogma weighing us to the ground, forcing us to use a zig-zag path, when a straight line is necessary.
While Jamaica is a signatory to the establishment of the CCJ, it has not signed on to its appellate jurisdiction.
“Expediency” seems to govern our every action.
A confident performance by Stuart you see why he is PM he is alert and knows whats going on he shows humility yet there is strength and grit and not unimportantly he’s got a sense of humour. Owen Arthur and George Payne the midgets that ambush my girl Mia in big trouble coming up against Stuart he bright, the man reads poetry and studies Treadeau and Bismarck for relaxation we have a PM who is an intellectual scholar with the rare ability to kill you with words.
To clarify the CCJ matter which has two jurisdictions 1. Original Jurisdiction and 2. Appellate. Jamaica like most Caricom countries has not signed on to the Appellate Jurisdiction. However as it applies to its Original Jurisdiction Jamaica can argue a case as it applies to the interpretation of the revised treaty of chaguaramas.
No, Yardbroom and Scout; the CCJ as David hinted has a dual jurisdiction. An original one whereby it is the final interpreter of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas and all the regional members of CARICOM have signed on to this. Then there is the appellate jurisdiction to which only Barbados, Guyana and Belize have signed on so far.
The Jamaicans can take the case to the CCJ if they are alleging that the actions of the Bajan officials were in breach of the Revised Treaty. There is no further appeal from this decision.
@Jack Spratt
Thanks, our comments crossed.
The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.