Members Of Parliament Or Judases? Clear Yourselves!

By Caswell Franklyn, Head of Unity Workers Union

All Members of Parliament are styled “Honourable”; however, the reported behaviour of the eleven that were featured in the Nation, as attempting to oust the Prime Minister, is anything other than honourable. I do not want to see them hiding behind semantics: I want them to come out, like the Honourable Denis Kellman, and say unequivocally that I had no part to play in this sordid mess so help me God. If they fail to publicly disassociate themselves from this reported act of treachery, they would forever stand condemn, in my mind as being worse than Judas.

I am not saying that there should never be any disagreement among party leaders and their fellow Members of Parliament. I am making bold to say that everyone of the persons that are reported to be associated with this bloodless coup attempt look extremely bad in my eyes right now. I heard is said once that anytime two people sit and always agree at least one is an idiot, so I would expect that there would be disagreement in any group of twenty-one people. However, the way that the dissent is handled speak volumes about the character of those involved, and quite frankly, their characters have taken a bashing by the force of category five public opinion.

I have heard the denials from persons who have taken the point that they did not place their signatures on any document. I dare say that is not good enough for the public: it might be good enough for a court of law, but the court of public opinion where you are guilty until proven innocent does not follow any legal rules. Politicians must always remember that they are not elected by the courts, and could very well achieve a pyrrhic victory there. Those who are denying any association with the document must realise that it is more than the document. They must come out and disavow any knowledge of the alleged clandestine move to oust Freundel Stuart. I believe that all right thinking persons in this country expect no less. The country does not want to hear any legal double speak: we want to hear an unambiguous statement to the effect that the story has no basis in fact. Failing that they would have signalled to their constituents that they are unsuited for the confidence that has been reposed in them.

The Barbadian public is very forgiving, even in the short term, of most things but I don’t think that such forgiveness extends to treachery. If you have any doubt cast your minds back to Clyde Mascoll’s crossing the floor. He is perceived as a traitor to the DLP: no one appears to trust him anymore, and now needs Owen Arthur to clear the way for his rehabilitation. He is a trained economist but, as part of his punishment for the perception of treachery, his economic pronouncements are now called into question. I believe he is sound but remember the court of public opinion still prefers Barabbas.

Now finally to Freundel Stuart, I can only sympathise with you. I cannot say that I know how you feel because I never had friends like yours.

175 thoughts on “Members Of Parliament Or Judases? Clear Yourselves!

  1. @Prodigal Son

    No one is trying to stop George from airing his views; I am just saying that he is basing his argument and conclusions on incomplete data, not a good position for an academic.

    George wear his politics on his sleeve and is prone to injecting that partisan flair into every situation; a recent example was when he came to the rescue of a squatter on these pages and took umbrage at the Minister who said he would remove her from the NHC unit.

    I have his best interests at heart I want to ensure that the acronym GIGO does not take on a new meaning “George in garbage out”. 🙂

  2. you BLP cronies are so full of it it is almost painful and nauseating to read your comments especially those espoused by the intelligent George Bratwaite who is doing his utmost best to aligned the ousting of MIA with a letter sent to our PM. George you have degraded yourself to such low esteem that it makes one wonder why on earth would one lay their on integrity on the line for a political party with a leader like OSA.

  3. @ Brief
    Answer – Me, Morris and the Parish.
    There has been a lot of criticism of the Nation’s reporting, much of it from people who are obviously died in the wool DLP supporters. The fact of the matter is that a significant number of members of the DLP are discontented with their leadership. If you read the Advocate you would hardly be aware anything is happening. That is not a credible position for a newspaper to be in.

  4. ac
    Why are you peeved about someone linking Mia to that letter, yet YOU are trying to link Owen to it even though he openly said, he will not get into other party matter. There are many members of the DLP woh are brave enough not to disassociate themselves from the letter, deal with them.

  5. The DLP has the Advocate and CBc, it appears the BLP has some footing within the Nation, however it is not as strong as the DLP in their supporting media. Both print and eletronic media in Barbados, are doing this country a dis-service by not being unbias in their reporting, this shows a serious lack of professionalism.

  6. Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow creeps in its petty pace from day to day like the last syllable of recorded time . Out out brief candle ….. let not light see my dark desires. The time has come and we shall see what we shall see. Those who say not me ane in no better position thatn those who have said nothing. The truth will out for dire consequences for those who have no balls You cannot go into sosmething in which there is common design and then rat on you colleagues. Shame Shame You are nol wothy to be called honourable that word to you is a nisnomer and you have to face your friends across the table. Can you look them straight in the face and talk to them. with them feeling you are a traitor and to want money for such dastardly deed is unthinkable. Think on therse things

  7. But in an attempt to possibly explain why some of the 11 MPs had issued strong denials while threatening this newspaper with legal action, he said unfortunately the letter was leaked to THE NATION with “only about two or three people [having] actually seen the draft”. (KJ)

  8. @ David

    The PM said they would be consequences but only if there was actually a palace coup.

    Chris Sinckler in his article with the Nation is basically testing the PM, he is saying “look me here, I have the balls to challenge you but let the public see that you do have the balls to fire me, just another example of your poor leadtership or lack thereof”

    PM please do us all a favour and FIRE this kid.

  9. It is time for me to re-focus and change frequencies, so I’m making my final blog on this issue. the Nation will most likely have to pay for not being able to report such a serious matter properly, this shows poor journalism. However, I have great respect for those who are brave enough to stick to their intentions. To those who were traitors to the group , to me you have lost your integrity. Whether the matter could have been handled differently is of no importance right now, the problem is, there is disquiet within the party and instead of heating it up anymore, the P.M needs to sit down with the FULL group and chart a way forward, any more disturbance within the party will mean a lost in the coming general election. TIME TO SHOW THE MEMBERS AND PARTY’S MATURITY.It is not too late to come out of this shining, however, Mr P.M you must watch those who back off in denial.

  10. Sinckler’s “attempted explanation” to the Nation further exposes the high level of DECEPTION that has bedevilled this whole saga. The deception of Sinckler and his cohorts was clearly aimed at creating the view that there was a majority group of Government members that was prepared for a confrontation with the Prime Minister even though only “TWO OR THREE” of the group had seen the letter which was supposed to be the instrument by which they had sought the confrontation.
    The deception of the Nation was to link ELEVEN parliamentarians, including about EIGHT OR NINE of them who had not even seen the letter, with disruptive activity within the government. This journalistic conduct cannot be condoned; IT IS DESERVING OF THE GREATEST CENSURE..

  11. Yesterday I suggested that Harbor Bay Toilet Paper is a better brand than the one manufactured on Fontabelle. I was 90 % sure at the time of posting. Today I am 100 % sure. There is no deception when you purchase Harbor Bay.. You get 500 sheets of quality paper on the roll. For the past week , Fontabelle has been recycling at least 2 sheets of the 50 without removing the faeces . What makes matters worse is that there is no apology from the manufacturer after 8 days of customers suffering the pain and inconvenience of using their product. Shame on you Fontabelle, you can no longer boast of being #1 in the #2 business.

  12. @ Eagle-Eyed
    The fact that only 11 out of 19 names were on the letter proves the matter was discussed among those members and the Nation needed not to be concerned with whether ALL 11 saw the ‘draft’, the key point is that they agreed in principle to the intent of the letter.
    The Parliamentary Group comprises all DLP MPs, so it is somewhat strange that 8 including the most senior member Kellman was not made aware. Why?
    Where the Nation erred was in stating that they affixed their signatures rather than names. If the aggrieved persons are smart they would refrain from heading to court. All the Nation needs to do is subpoena Chris Sinckler.

  13. Time for a BU Party and a BU Today newspaper. The society, voters, populace and younger generation are the unfortunate and unseen collateral damage from this week of BS. Sad day in journalism, politics, and once again the DLP.

  14. A Stroke of genius by THE NATION in getting such an interview from CHRIS SINCKLER But then again it makes one wonder what are they holding against CHRIS . Could it be the possibility he is the source of the letter and trying to save face before that is revealed.FOR sure for CHRIS to do the interview with the NATION is more than revealing and it purpose so far has cast suspicion in his direction as the one Who might have LEAKED The LETTER;CHRIS YOU ARE MINCED MEAT! Talk about killing two Birds with one stone. The NATION has cleverly taken the spotlight off themselves and reinforce it on the DLP with CHRIS SINCKLER being the main Character!

    • What is happening here is consistent with info BU has been receiving.

      The NATION received a copy of a draft letter with a promise that a letter with 11 signatures would follow.

      The NATION stupidly went to print on the basis of the draft, there was a leak by someone (?)NOW and the rest is history, Chris is possibly NOW standing on his own.

      What cannot be denied is that some in the party have a concern about Stuart.

      Maybe this will be a wakeup call for Stuart and others in the party to pay attention and do what is required to mobilize the troops!

      Arthur seems to be busy doing what he has to do by first nuetralizing Mia and now about to capitalize on DLP errors.

  15. To david:
    Why are you so concerned about what Owen id doing. i have already said that it looks like you have a bias for the DLP. Come out and say.

    • @lemmie

      Shouldn’t Barbadians be concerned about what is happening on the BLP side as well?

      Isn’t it the government in waiting?

      Get use to BU putting both parties under the microsocope.

      None will be spared.

  16. To AC:
    I always told you that you have no electricity. How could you believe the propaganda emanating from george street, and now you have egg on your big fat DLP face.

  17. To David:
    Sometimes you appear as if there is something personal about not wanting the BLP in power again. But that is your right I am not faulting you for it. For If the people look favorably on the BLP I would hope the Owen has enough sense to do something like what Stuart will do to Sinker, as Mia was part of this scheme.

  18. @ ac
    I actually agree with you. No need to print a letter when one of the most senior members of Cabinet validates their story.

    On a related matter, 3S lawsuit to be settled out of court. More evidence of bad decision-making rooted in demagoguery. Lagan next?

  19. Dear Mr PM,

    Please kick Sinckler all the way to the back bench after you put a hart slap in John ‘Sir Laugh-a-Lot’ Boyce.

    Don’t give them two a next time to plot and hang you high, seems thats what they on behalf of their sponsors, want to do.

  20. Well, well, well! Only in Barbados! I shall not nor will I gloat. The national interest (the people) of the country first and after that anything can play.


    Seeing that there are some out there that wanted to taint me sordid; I would like to urge you to ask them if they would at least retreat. I do not expect it, but it does make me wonder about many things.

  21. @ lemeul
    What egg the NATION did say that they will disclose today the evidence . Where is the evidence of a coup.? I am still awaiting it! Maybe you should read the letter submitted by Minister Ronald Jones questioning the creditability of the letter lest you forget . Please don’t confuse the issue.

  22. @ Enuff
    Don’t bother agreeing with me! i am still of the opinion that the NATION is and was misleading the public about a coup. Nothing about that has changed. So far they have failed to produce the evidence but have opted to throw Chris Sinckler under the bus for his role in knowing about the revealtion of the letter! The Nation has not come out unscathed in all this only have changed the rules of the game. I am watching!

  23. @GEORGE Brathwaite

    BTW what did you say. Did you agree or did you not agree that the letter was indeed a coup with eleven names attached and delivered to the PM. Come clean George !

  24. @ ac

    I do not even know what you want to understand from me. You are intelligent and you can read. Go and do matters that only ‘ac’ can.

  25. @ac
    You talking pup!!
    What was printed in barbadostoday yesterday? Did it not contain the exact extracts the Nation printed, and why wasn’t the 2nd page of the ‘two-page letter’, as reported by barbadostoday, printed? Sinckler’s confession trumps any letter, unless you want to argue that the Nation drugged Sinckler or the person that did the interview was an impostor.

    • @enuff

      You are correct in your last comment which is a different point to what BU has been arguming which is, the NATION has misled Barbadians based on its original story of last week.

  26. You guys left me to wonder – some of you actually!!!

    I discuss with my colleagues that we should meet with our boss and we agree. Then before we could see a document or even know of the letter – yes I am on record as being present at the initial meeting to discuss matters of grave concern with the Boss – a letter is drafted.

    I was present at the meeting not privy to the final contents and probable changed intent of the nature of the meeting. Am I guilty of the last decision not being privy to it? No, I am not.

    I maybe called to testify, I may even be charged but I shall be set free because I did not take part in the last decision. My heart was on discussing with my Boss charting a way forward due to public opinion of our management and image – not to over throw the Boss. My image is much more important to me than my ego and ambition – some of us can watch and pray as we work diligently and wait patiently.

    Personally, I cannot see these people putting Chris Sinckler as their leader regardless of how Wickham feels. Chris did not play a strategic role in winning last election – Hardwood did – he delivered the Hardwood findings and he ran in place of Mascoll who crossed. That’s where he gain popularity besides that he has nothing. He is looked upon now because he is MOF respect merited by position not ability nor capactiy – he had opportunity to prove himself.

    • “I am not dealing with any of that. I have no comment on that: I know nothing about that other than what I read in the Press”.

      That was Sinckler’s response on the CBC TV news on Monday night (December 12, 2011) From his interview published in today’s Sunday, he acknowledged the existence of the now infamous letter. Both pronouncements cannot be the truth. If for no other reason than lying to the country, he should be removed from the Cabinet. However, lying to the country is not the only charge that he has to face: the other and more serious charge is that of being disloyal to the Prime Minister. For argument sake, let’s assume that Sinckler was not the originator of the plot: he was duty bound to report the matter to the Prime Minister. But that can be said for all those who did not report the existence of the plot to the PM.

      I am not seeking to advise the PM, but it is clear to me that he has to punish this disloyalty but who to punish would at first seem to be the problem since so many of his colleagues are involved. I dare say that he can’t fire all so he would have to punish in order to send a message. Unless Ronald Jones and Ardiel Brathwaite were the ones to aquaint him of the behing-the-scene dealing, their heads along with Sinckler’s should roll. Brathwaite is the Attorney General and should know the law relating to the appointment of the PM and should have advised the others of the stupidity of their actions. Jones seem to be the most trusted since it is he who Stuart has deputised without making the announcement.

      Finally, the Executive Council of the party should be called upon to deselect the candidates for the next election who took part in this attempted coup d’etat. A party leader cannot be seen as going into an election with people he can’t trust.

  27. The Nation said:

    ‘In a SUNDAY SUN exclusive, Sinckler confirmed that a letter had indeed been drafted with the names of the 11 DLP members affixed and for immediate dispatch to the Prime Minister.’

    The Nation said signatures affixed in the Sunday Sun report contrary to what Chris is saying today.

    (1) Now who is the mole in the DLP?

    Kaymar WAS NOT clean in her reporting and she with the Nation Publishing should be held accountable for misrepresenting the official document by stating in print that actual signatures were affixed and that it was delivered. An official document is not a Draft. This was not a Bill going into Parliament for discussion.

    I reiterate – signing that I am present at a meeting – does not say that I agree to contents of an official document being presented to anyone with the blessing.

  28. @Brief

    I urge you to write on other matters less you too show deceit and contempt for BU readers and the people of Barbados. Tread bravely but carefully.

  29. Enuff do i really care how many names e attached to “ALETTER” requesting a meeting the PM. NO!. what is of real concerned above the letter is who revealed it to the Nation and why? also why wasn’t the PM in formed about the letter? those are the major areas of concern.

  30. @ David
    The Nation, unfortunately, was thinking out loud. They should have reported affixed their names rather than signatures. However, the Nation never used the word coup as they did with the Mia affair.

    Interesting comments from last week:
    Minister Sinckler: “I’m not dealing with any of that. I have no comment on that; I know nothing about that other than what I read in the Press”

    “Yesterday, one source close to Stuart further indicated that some of the 11, who came under intense public scrutiny following the publication of concerns, were now suffering from cold feet and had indicated to Stuart that they were not prepared to press him any further on a meeting to discuss his leadership style.”

  31. So we’ve learnt that politicians are lying deceitful calculating power hungry creatures concerned only with their own skin rather than true national interest. Also, the media works on sales, sensationalism and suspect reporting rather than facts and truth. And last but not least, our society accepts tolerates and disregards all the above. Par for the course.

  32. To Freundel Stuart:
    Owen always like to roll his pen with a twinkle in his eye and tell you “you need sometimes to shoot a General to bring the rest of the troops in line.”

  33. Having read sinckler’s interview with the Nation Editor, I can find no more appropriate word to describe than DISINGENUOUS..The rubbish that he subjected the reading public to could not impress even the brain-dead. I am sure that he will soon have unlimited time to serve up all the rubbish that his loquaciousness has been inflicting upon us..

    • The issue is not who sign or did not sign the letter: it is who knew of the plot and failed to inform the leader that there was a move afoot to oust him him. Freundel clearly cannot go into battle with those conspirators behind him. He would have to lead from the rear.

      If the DLP somehow manages to capture a majority in the next election, and assuming that Stuart wins his seat, he would be toppled at that point. He can’t trust them: he needs to be rid of them and find new candidates. He certainly can’t do worse than he is doing now.

      I might get this old saying wrong but if I do you can certainly correct me:
      “There is no honour among politicians”.

  34. @CASWELL.
    I can think of no other time when you have been so ON THE BALL. It is clear that you fully understand what has to be the way forward. And you know what Caswell? I am absolutely sure that Prime Minister Stuart KNOWS TOO.

  35. @ ac
    Demagoguery and lying is a trademark of this administration gaining power and governing–cost of living, ABC highway and 3S………..

  36. Caswell, I like the end of your last post. There is no honour among politicians. And I thought that there was a difference between politicians and thieves.

  37. I am wondering if someone is telling Stuart that he has to act in a timely fashion to let the country know that he is still in charge of the DLP and this country. He needs to act decisively but not doing harm to his party.

Leave a comment, join the discussion.