Est.2007

Barbados Underground

Bringing News and Opinions to the People

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.

Barbados’s Imitation Democracy

← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

CONTACT THE BLOGMASTER ONLY

Submitted by Caswell Franklyn
The Houses of Parliament, seen across Westminster Bridge in England – Wikipedia

At a press conference just prior to his 80th birthday in March 2011, former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev said of his country Russia:

“We have everything – a parliament, courts, a president, a prime minister and so on. But it’s more of an imitation… We have institutions but they don’t work. We have laws but they must be enforced”.

With the exception of the reference to a president, those sentiments are equally true for Barbados. Our country is supposed to be a democracy which operates under the Westminster System of governance as practiced in England. We have copied all the major democratic institutions from England but our copy does not work. It seems as though when they were making our copy of the Westminster System, the copier was extremely low on toner.

One of the main planks of the Westminster System is a separation of powers among the three branches of government, namely: the judiciary, parliament and the executive (cabinet). In Barbados the separation that is vital for the effective functioning of the state is virtually non-existent. What passes for governance in Barbados makes a mockery of the Westminster System and is merely a parody that should be an embarrassment for an educated people.

According to the Westminster System, the lower house of parliament has the power to dismiss the Government. In our present parliament, the cabinet forms the largest group of members in the House of Assembly, even bigger than the Opposition and the Government backbench combined. It therefore means that the Cabinet members of the House can out vote the other members, which in effect means that the House of Assembly has no control over the Cabinet. What we have can only be described as a dictatorship operating under the guise of a parliamentary democracy.

In order to dismiss a government, the House would have to pass a resolution with a two-thirds majority, but that is not realistic because in order to do so the Cabinet would have to vote against itself, effectively making them a judge in their own cause. If our Parliament is to function as part of a truly democratic system, the members of the Cabinet who are also members of the House should be restricted to a maximum of one-third of the size of the House. However, even a cabinet of ten members seems a bit much when you consider that Barbados is really a micro state with few resources. The only reason why a prime minister of this country would need such a large cabinet would be to provide jobs for his colleagues. A cabinet which contains sixteen members of the House in the context of a House of Assembly of thirty persons destroys any notion of a separation of powers between the Cabinet and the Parliament.

The non-existence of a separation of powers between the Executive and the Parliament is cause for concern, but of greater concern should be the non-existence of a separation between the Executive and the judiciary. The Governor-General appoints judges on the advice of the Prime Minister after consultation with the Leader of the Opposition, but the Leader of the Opposition has no power to block the Prime Minister’s choice. Effectively, the Prime Minister appoints the judiciary. The unseemly spectacle that emerged surrounding the appointment of the present Chief Justice should make every right thinking person shudder, but the Prime Minister got his man.

Another cause of concern that does nothing to put a distance between the Executive and the judiciary is the fact that a high court judge could only be promoted to the Court of Appeal with the Prime Minister’s blessing. Just imagine that you have a case against the Government in the High Court and there is a vacancy in the Court of Appeal, and immediately after you lost the case, the judge who presided in your case is promoted to the Court of Appeal. Would you be able to shake the belief that the judge sold you out for the promotion? Whenever a person loses a case against the Government or the court awards small damages against the Crown, there will always be the lingering belief that something went wrong because of the non-existence of a separation of powers between the Executive and the judiciary, which takes away a judge’s independence. There is a saying that justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done: there will never be the appearance of justice being done as long as the Government maintains its control over the judiciary.

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

140 responses to “Barbados’s Imitation Democracy”

  1. balance Avatar
    balance

    thank you mr franklyn. your comments mirrors my recent lamentations and fulminations about the ineffectiveness of the system of governance in barbados leading me to call for banning of political institutions and the experimentation of a new form of parliamentary governance where parliamentarians would be answerable to their constituencies and not a political party.

  2. David Avatar
    David

    A reminder that our own Bush Tea tabled a ‘draft’ alternative for discussion which was received with little enthusiasm. Now maybe a good time to restate.

    …How about this….
    1- BARP and the Credit Union leaders (The Congress) get together and put up a plan of action and a panel of candidates for the ‘Peoples Party’.
    2- Each nominee signs an undated letter of resignation to be held by the Congress
    3 – Congress appoints a National Supervisory Committee chaired by Caswell.
    4 – In the next elections, Bajans elect this team to execute the agenda documented by the Congress.
    5. Caswell’s committee will be responsible for FOI and transparency; the Congress can date and accept any letter of resignation as needed.
    No charge for the Bushman’s consultancy….. and Bushie’s hero Ed Bushell is the perfect chairman for the congress…..
    Follow the full commentary HERE

  3. Green Monkey Avatar
    Green Monkey

    “There is a saying that justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done” – now that holds true for the UK as well.


    David Halpin reacts after a judge refuses his case for a judicial review of the UK gov’s decision to refuse to re-open the inquest into Dr David Kelly’s death. Interviewed by Hassan Ghani.

  4. George C. Brathwaite Avatar
    George C. Brathwaite

    @Caswell

    While I do understand your inclination to want to gain public support for reform of the governance system in Barbados, one must be precise and accurate in understanding what you have and what it is that you want to address or remedy.
    May I humbly say that you have made a fundamental error in stating that: “One of the main planks of the Westminster System is a separation of powers among the three branches of government, namely: the judiciary, parliament and the executive (cabinet).”
    Indeed, the ‘separation of powers’ is found in the system known as the Presidential system as practised in the USA.
    However, the Westminster system is characterised by a fusion of powers, namely between the legislature and the executive with the judiciary sitting outside of that two although usually selected through one or both organs of the legislature and executive.
    This style is not peculiar to Barbados; in fact it is practised at Whitehall in the UK and in the largest system following a Westminster model, that being India.
    However, built into that system are several other checks and balances (theoretically and practically) for which a number of proposed reforms have been recommended (e.g. see the Forde report on constitutional reform).

  5. David Avatar
    David

    A short-coming of the current governance system and one highlighted several times in previous blogs is the lack of performance by the Working Committees of the House.

    In the UK because of the size of the MP population there is a rich and diverse group of individuals which comprised the Committees and therefore maximum benefit is derived by their participation.

    What does one have in Barbados?

  6. Sargeant Avatar
    Sargeant

    As someone who knows nothing about Law and even less about the Constitution let me open with a quote from Sir Winston Churchill

    “Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time”

    I won’t counter any argument about the separation of powers but in our system of first past the post, many MPs of the Governing Party may be elected with narrow majorities which could lead to a large number of Gov’t MPs and a small Opposition although the percentage of votes separating the victorious party from the losing Party may be narrow. We can opt for proportional representation but that system brings its own set of problems.

    Caswell has attacked the appointment of the CJ before but he engages in hyperbole with the following “The unseemly spectacle that emerged surrounding the appointment of the present Chief Justice should make every right thinking person shudder” Really? What was unseemly about appointing a qualified Barbadian to a job in Barbados? How does a “right thinking person” think? If someone thinks as you do does that make him or her a “right thinking person”?

    I believe that in all Commonwealth Countries the CJ is selected by either the Head of Gov’t or by the elected Executive of Gov’t (which means the PM as Head of the Executive will have the final word). The PM in Barbados selected a CJ and it is all water under the bridge, beating a dead horse will not revive it, let’s wish him Godspeed and hope he does a good job.

  7. David Avatar
    David

    @Sargeant

    To be fair in the argument Caswell seems to be attacking more the ‘system’ and not CJ Marston the individual.

    Bear in mind BU supported the appointment.

  8. balance Avatar
    balance

    it is not as easy as that sarge to dismiss the highhandedness of a government changing the laws to cover-up their lack of due diligence in trying to appoint a Cj. i do not know the CJ and can therefore have nothing against him. it’s not about him but the method of his appointment. you just can’t go about changing laws to suit one’s whims and fancies. after all, we are not a banana republic. no wonder everthing of worth breaking down.

  9. Trenton Avatar
    Trenton

    have you heard about Guyana and considered the situation there

  10. Marlo ray Avatar
    Marlo ray

    Madden and English writer commented that the Westminster system was “never intended for export” but was intended to be “consumed on local premises” only. We in the Caribbeen copied a system that was not designed to work in our countries. Hence the variance between it’s operation within a unwritten constitutional framework ( Britain) and a written framework ( Caribbean)

  11. David Avatar
    David

    @Marlo ray

    Copied or inherited?

    Just that we have not had the ‘balls’ to effectively adapt it because it suited our little agenda to align our system/history with the UK.

    Now the UK has shown its gratitude by its handling of the APD.

  12. Legalese. Avatar
    Legalese.

    This article is written on a false premise so everything based upon it must tumble down. The false premise is that there is indeed a separation of powers practised in Westminster. The attempt at an idealist separation went through the window at Whitehall ever since the introduction of Cabinet Government and the institution of the “whip ” system which ensures that Cabinet keeps the backbench in line. What has always been operating therefore is a FUSION rather than a separation of powers . This fact led Lord Hailsham, formerly Mr Quintin Hogg, to refer to the executive as ” the elected dictatorship” following his observation on the manner in which the Legislature is dominated by the Executive. In actual fact, the doctrine has come to mean no more than the indipendence of the judiciary.
    The separation of powers as practised in Barbados is a CARBON COPY of the Westminster doctrine, a far cry from what the originator of the doctrine Baron Montesquieu of France conceptualised, i.e. a system which saw the three administrative arms of the state : the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary functioning as separate, individual entities functioning WITHOUT any interference by each other. Indeed the American practice of the doctrine comes much closer to Montesquieu’s prototype.
    While i do admire the zeal of the writer of this piece, I would caution him against engaging in the practice of setting up a straw man to shoot him down; there is always the need to go beyond merely scratching the surface
    In addition, I must ask him to accept that there is much good about what we do here in Barbados.

  13. David Avatar
    David

    @Legalese

    Your good history lesson not withstanding do you agree that we (Barbadians) should always endevour to find ways to improve the system we have?

    Your posit recognizes that the Westminster System is a bastardized one anyway.

  14. Legalese. Avatar
    Legalese.

    @ David.
    Yes I do agree that there will always be a need to ADAPT systems to make them more compatible with contemporary demands. Indeed Britain has restructured its court system and now has a revamped Supreme Court .There is no pure system; they all borrow and are chopped and changed to suit the demands of the State. In this regard, it is my view that we must put a Law Reform Commission in place to implement new workable legislation and jettison that which has become anachronistic.
    You would therefore understand, David, that I am far from reactionary. the tenor of my post above was simply to attempt to disabuse the mind that we in Barbados are practising some banana republic type of Seraration of Powers when in fact we have been faithful to the system given to us by our colonizers.
    As a further observation let me remind that until the reform of the British court system, ALL judges were appointed by the Lord Chancellor, A POLITICIAN. We are not far behind. Give us time.
    Finally ,let me express my support to your forum for providing an avenue for discussing these very important issues.

  15. David Avatar
    David

    @Legalise

    Thanks for your elucidation and plaudit.

    Some will react in lukewarm manner to your suggestion to establish a Law Review Commission or some similar animal not because it is not deemed necessary but more so to our poor execution of recommendations tabled by such bodies over the years.

  16. Legalese. Avatar
    Legalese.

    @ David
    Well, when that happens, dont blame the Commission; put it down to the lack of will which causes valuable suggestions to remain merely suggestions. We must demonstrate the will to adapt to NECESSARY change and implement NECESSARY reform. If we do not do this we will be left far behind.

  17. lemuel Avatar
    lemuel

    To Legalese:
    You come here talking about premise and conclusion and validity of argumentation, but go on to prove that what Caswell is saying or writing is correct. You even presented the author of the process. So where is the fallacy you are so straining to excrete. Some of you dislike that fact that when Caswell puts forward a position, most of us you can not deal with it. Hence, we have to read the diatribe that is posing as knowledgeable opinion from you. Try to enlighten; don’t waste time with the meaningless tearing down syndrome. The original concept was to have all three branches separated and functioning independently to provide safe guards within a system which virtually renders the Prime Minister and all politicians political tyrants.

  18. Legalese. Avatar
    Legalese.

    @ lemuel
    I will leave it to David who clearly understands my post to respond on my behalf. You clearly do not understand what I presented. Anyhow, do have a good day.

  19. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ lemuel | December 29, 2011 at 8:28 AM |
    “The original concept was to have all three branches separated and functioning independently to provide safe guards within a system which virtually renders the Prime Minister and all politicians political tyrants.”

    To compound matters the 1974 Constitutional Amendments gave more powers to the political executive thus making the PS and Heads of Depts mere rubber stampers to affix signatures to documents and fall guys when inefficiency, incompetence and corruption are exposed.

    Ministers run rough shod over the management of the executive agencies of government and get involved in the day-to-day affairs of the bodies to the extent that simple spending and manpower allocation decisions must be sanctioned by the minister. If the proposed solution or recipient of contract does not meet the personal likes of the minister or the party’s interest you can forget about it. Even the simple task of hiring temporary staff at statutory bodies must be done by ministerial dictate. But what can one expect from a bunch of nincompoops some of them never even run a one-door shop (except for one from the North, of course) where policy conceptualisation and initiation are foreign or even anathema to their skills set.

    The recommendations of the Forde Commission and the much promised FoI and Integrity legislation would not see the light of day is this “small island, plantation, banana republic like” political environment

  20. George C. Brathwaite Avatar
    George C. Brathwaite

    @lemuel

    I am sorry that I have to do it again. I have in the past questioned your capacity to understand what many others see as simple and unambiguous. Your response to Legalese is another fine example of your unwillingness to think through things and be through in your deliberation. Combined with what I wrote, and what Legalese wrote, and supported by David’s comments, you would recognise that all and sundry support the idea of a reform to a system that has either worked in the past but now needs reshaping, or one that has survived rather than functioned at its optimal levels. There was no castigation of Caswell. What I did, and subsequently re-emphasised by Legalese is that the premise for which Caswell builds his case is inaccurate regarding the ‘separation of powers’ and the Westminster model. The Westminster model and Whitehall in England practice a fusion of powers between the legislature and executive.
    I urge you to read carefully and try to understand before rambling as if to discredit the literacy rate in Barbados.

  21. lemuel Avatar
    lemuel

    To Legalese:
    Read Miller’s post, and educate yourself. I continue to submit that you armed with Law 101 come here jumping up and down at “big people” dance with little or no proper foundation for your argumentation which leaves a lot to be desired. Because you say so does not make it so. At your level of contemplation my friend would miss you points every day.

  22. David Avatar
    David

    @Lemmie

    You do understand that you and Legalese are closer on this issue than you are apart?

  23. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    Legalese

    A separation of powers work in the United Kingdom, simply because the Executive/Cabinet is only a small fraction of the House of Commons. A bachbench revolt in the UK can bring down the government. However, in Barbados there are only three persons on the backbench, so a revolt by them would only make good press. Even combined with the Opposition, they can’t out vote the Cabinet members in the House. There are therefore no checks and balance against an out of control Cabinet as contemplated by the Westminster System.

  24. lemuel Avatar
    lemuel

    To George Brathwaite:
    I would have thought that having read the article, you and legalese would have been able to separate the concept of the west Minister model from what is being practiced. There is and always shall remain the difference between the theory and the application of the concepts derived from that theory. In essence, that is the point being made here by Caswell.

  25. Angela Ifill Avatar
    Angela Ifill

    You all idealist here seem to forget “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”No matter what system you have as history has prove, men love darkness, cause their hearts are full with wickedness.

    You all here fooling yourselves or trying to fool someone because it’s not the system you put in place it is the heart.Man at his core is bound to failure no matter what system he puts in place so therefore checks and balances is the best we can do. The contributors here advocating utopia seem to forget the evil that men do.

  26. George C. Brathwaite Avatar
    George C. Brathwaite

    @ Lemuel

    You were 100 % correct when you wrote: “Try to enlighten; don’t waste time with the meaningless tearing down syndrome.” However, you may see for yourself that while I do agree and truly want to support your call for enlightening persons, they are some among us such as Miss Angela Ifil will resist such a mark of mutual respect. So that simplicity reigns instead of the challenge to do better or to work towards the reforms that Caswell speak of relating to the faults within our application of the system of governance. I say no more, but I urge all of you to continue with the ideas; exactly how new things emerge.

  27. Legalese. Avatar
    Legalese.

    @ Caswell.
    under the Westminster system the party whips exercise rigorous control of the backbenchers regardless of their number. Any revolt on the part of the backbenchers would be just that .. A REVOLT which , if successful, would bring down the Government. The Cabinet DOES NOT rely upon its size for control of the backbench ; the Westminster system relies heavily upon the observance of conventions to make the constitution work and that has been crucial.

  28. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    Legalese

    I thought that you would have intervened to enlighten me about my misunderstanding of the system. You did not. You have only strenghtened what I have been saying. You speak of conventions making the system work, but in the way we practice the Westminster System in Barbados those conventions do not factor into what we do. Let me demonstrate by way of example: When Owen Arthur married one of his secretaries and then disclosed that he was the biological father of her seven year old child, he would have to resign under the conventions. When Chris Sinckler was heard to say on television that the only thing he knew of the plot was what he read in the press and then came back a few days later and acknowledged that he knew. That would have also triggered a resignation or dismissal.

    What is practiced in Barbados is a massive corruption of the Westminster System. In England the move away from the pure system can be tolerated because the Cabinet is never in a position to out vote the peoples representatives

  29. Legalese. Avatar
    Legalese.

    @ Caswell.
    The conventions of the British Constitution which we have adopted can be read in our written Constitution ; a reading of them should advise how the misconduct which you accuse Mr Arthur and Mr Sinckler of should be treated.
    You however continue to miss the point…THE CABINET IN ENGLAND DOES NOT HAVE TO OUTVOTE ” THE PEOPLE’S REPRESENTATIVES; THE CABINET CONTROLS THEM. hence the title given to the cabinet ..” THE ELECTED DICTATORSHIP”.

  30. Hants Avatar
    Hants

    Caswell Franklyn wrote
    “When Owen Arthur married one of his secretaries and then disclosed that he was the biological father of her seven year old child, he would have to resign under the conventions.

    “Under the conventions” why would he have to resign?

  31. Crazy Stupid Us Avatar
    Crazy Stupid Us

    @ Caswell Franklyn

    Was it not Chris Sinckler who said in a Ministerial Statement in the House of Assembly in April 2011 that Barbados Tourism Investment Inc has award a contract for the Pierhead Marina via a Memorandum of Understanding to SMI Infrastructure Solutions Inc pursuant to A COMPLETED TENDER PROCESS?

    I make no apologies but that statement is a blatant lie. To be exact, the BTI did not and could not award a contract to SMI Infrastructure Solutions Inc pursuant to a completed tender process as that process contained certain bid rules which pre-cluded a NONBIDDER from being awarded the contract to build the Pierhead Marina.

  32. Hants Avatar
    Hants

    It is obvious that Constitutions and laws should be reviewed and changed from time to time.

    The man who cut cane and manage to send to school his children who are now doctors lawyers and bankers is probably not too unhappy with the way Barbados was “ruled”.

    It is now his educated children and grand children who will want to change the status quo.

  33. wizard Avatar
    wizard

    What semblance of a Democracy we had in Barbados was all destroyed by Owen Seymour Arthur in 2001.

    It is strikingly ironic that some years later, Caswell Franklyn who concurred with the Arthur decision of 2001, would now seek to pontificate on the issue as highlighted above.

    Where was the voice of REASON of Caswell Franklyn in 2001 when Arthur made David Simmons Chief Justice of Barbados ?

    Thereby prejudicing the Cabinet , Parliament & Judiciary – all 3 where David Simmons – had his hands in !

  34. Clone Avatar
    Clone

    Caswell
    As a person who likes to argue law. I think you are misleading me by saying that Chris Sinckler admitted that he knew of a plot. He said that he knew of the draft letter not a plot.
    Caswell as a man who some person suggested to lead some committee to oversee integrity I think you must be more accurate.

  35. lemuel Avatar
    lemuel

    I was waiting to see the solutions/option that should be put in place to fix our broken system. Yet, all I see and read are lamentations which are getting louder than the worse day for the Prophet Jeremiah. I do not know of many people who were happy with the “switch” done by David Simmons. We need to fix that hole. There is some consternation with the manner in which the present Chief Justice was installed. We need to fix that too. But until we have a real coup not the Sinker coup, we shall continue to have our elected officials taking advantage of the lack of checks and balances to do political foolishness in Barbados. For too long we have been operating just under the standards of a Banana Republic.

  36. David Avatar
    David

    @lemmie

    What we have is Barbadians at this juncture demanding more transparency and accountability in governance and a growing disrespect for conventions.

  37. Clone Avatar
    Clone

    I also believe you are allowing Caswell to get away with making points that he never substantiate. I am not attacking him but you highlight the hypocrisy of the print media in Barbados of which I agree but Caswell also shows a high level of hypocrisy. As the writer above showed that he never spoke of the undemocratic practices of Government when he was Personal aid to the last Chief Justice. Therefore it can be concluded that he has a hidden agenda

  38. lemuel Avatar
    lemuel

    To Clone:
    I shall not attempt to defend Caswell; he can do that very nicely for himself. But I would very much want you to SUBSTANTIATE the hidden agenda. For example, how shall this piece profit him? Name any personal assistant or any person working close to the top who dares to criticize and still working at that job. Bring proof from any way in the world.

  39. Clone Avatar
    Clone

    Lemuel
    You proved my point.
    He is therefore not a man of these great principles he projects.

  40. enuff Avatar
    enuff

    The Barba-topian dreams continue!! An island of 10 people, yet we expect governance without cousins, schoolmates and in-laws hiring each other; a backbench big enough to keep the frontbench in line when there are a mere 30 seats; and appointments to the post of CJ with politics cue Sir David and Marston Gibson (Wizard who you re trying to fool?). Politics is more than political parties!!
    As for the claim of Owen having to resign for a daughter out of wedlock is pure rubbish!! .
    As ‘Angela Ifill’ inferred, and I have said repeatedly it is about the individual. Sir David was a BLP MP but where is the evidence to suggest he was political as CJ? CJ Gibson was also politically appointed but I don’t expect him to be political either.
    We need quality…simples!! Go get involve in party politics and help shape the slate of candidates.

  41. lemuel Avatar
    lemuel

    To Enuff:
    I do not know any one knowing David Simmons who would suggest that he misused the office of CJ. Neither do I know of any one who would suggest that Marston Gibson would. Both are as far as i know honorable men.But appreciate that people have a right to voice an opinion on things when done which do look right or smell right.

  42. David Avatar
    David

    @enuff

    Please tell us by your logic if we should dispense with maintaining our governance framework?

    How do we ensure that those of ‘integrity’ who are selected toe the line?

    How do we ignore that in a world which demands transparency in public and private sectors we have the structure in place to deliver?

  43. enuff Avatar
    enuff

    @ Lemuel
    But isn’t that the problem–perception vs reality? If the man did nothing that was questionable it proves my point.

    @ David
    Could we not count on you to be an MP of the highest integrity if elected to parliament? Checks and balances (FOI and IL) exist in Trinidad & Tobago–a nation that perennially ranks lower than B’dos on the corruption index.

  44. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    Enuff

    You wrote:
    “As for the claim of Owen having to resign for a daughter out of wedlock is pure rubbish!!”

    Are you aware that no one said that. As a matter of fact, Owen Arthur was very much in wedlock only not with the mother of the child who also happened to be one of his personal staff. That is why I suggested that he should have resigned.

  45. David Avatar
    David

    @enuff

    Yours is an obvious position, of course the desired position is to select quality people. Regrettably the idealistic position you offer would require a level of clairvoyance.

  46. UNEDUCATED Avatar
    UNEDUCATED

    @Caswell

    The West Minister model speak to the Legislature, the Eexecutive and the Judiciary known as LEJ. Parliament passes laws and that mean both the upper and the lower house, the Eexecutive is the Civil Service and carries out the policies of Goverment through the various statutes and regulations.

    Theoretically there is the separation of powers, but regretfully some persons because of their desire to cilmb up the social ladder to get the high paying jobs might accept intereference from the legislative arm (mainly parliamentarians who are Ministers). By the way, in England which you reference, power and richess are the order of the day influencing the decsion process. By the way, Great Britains is no different from Barbados, it is on when Members of Parliament are caught hansy pansying that they resign. A lot of them are no less coorupt than the politicians in the Caribbean.

    The West Minister model is for the righ and priveledge, that is was the genesis of the West Minister model so please dont let us fool ourselves. Patronage is the oreder of the day of the model. Look at how people become Baronesses, Peers etc.

  47. enuff Avatar
    enuff

    @ David
    I am a realist, my aim is not to elect the PERFECT just the best possible.
    @ Caswell
    Resign for committing adultery? Isn’t there suppose to be a separation of Church & State too? Do some research on these current members of the UK Parliament–Bryant, Huhne, Laws, Hughes, Gove.

  48. Bush Tea Avatar
    Bush Tea

    Amazing!!!
    Caswell makes the case that our system of governance is a sham and blames it on the ineffectiveness of the checks and balances that are intended to exist between the three branches…….and…
    Somehow the discussion is focussed on the fact that the British system is also flawed…???!!! What the shirt!!! Talk about red herrings…..

    The question is “How is it possible to put in place a powerful and focussed body of persons whose role would be to monitor the work of Government and to provide the degree of openness and transparency needed to keep otherwise CROOKED politicians and other public employees in line and in check.

    Bush Tea’s proposal is based on a model that has worked successfully in Barbados (and other places) with crooked politicians; with lots of money; and has seen outstandingly successful growth and development…..

    It is called the SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE and it works in the Cooperative Movement like a dream. This model can be applied at the national level with extreme ease – and will work even better than it has in the Credit Unions…..

  49. Ping Pong Avatar
    Ping Pong

    Bush Tea’s proposal of an omnipotent Supervisory Committee is reminiscent of Iran’s Guardian Council and the Expediency Council.

    By the way, does the victory of Portia Simpson-Millar and the PNP in the J’can elections have any implications for B’dos?

  50. Bush Tea Avatar
    Bush Tea

    @ Ping Pong
    Omnipotent Supervisory Committee???
    You still stale drunk Ping…? Bush Tea’s proposal is EXACTLY like that that exists in EVERY Cooperative Body in Barbados for the past 50 years.
    Let’s see your Review of Literature…..

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