Shame On You Rawle!

Submitted by Porridgeboy

Rawle Eastmond MP

I had no intention of voicing my opinion on the ongoing saga between the Barbados Labour Party (BLP) incumbent in St. James North  and the branch of that constituency. First let me say I do not see why this internal matter has been placed in the public domain at this time. Secondly,  I can’t understand why Mr Rawle Eastmond would seek a meeting with Mr. Owen Arthur, Opposition Leader and Political Leader of the BLP on a matter that is clearly set out in the constitution of the party. Thirdly, it boggles  my mind  why Miss Mia Mottley would  seek a private meeting  with Mr Arthur as stated  in the Nation newspaper, page 30, January 2012 to discuss the Rawle Eastmond issue  via text to Mr Arthur.  This is after being informed one week earlier that nether he [Arthur] or she [Mottley] can do any thing at this time or at no time on this issue because the party  process must be allow to work . What is so hard in that to understand?

Miss Mottley spoke of her attempt to heal the party but she seeks a meeting with the Political Leader via text message and the newspaper to discuss matters in private. What rubbish! I find this to be intolerable and an insult to the post of the Opposition Leader’s Office, when she knows very well that this matter or any other matters could be raised in the right forum if requested. Who is she trying to convince? Is it herself? What is the real agenda? Is it to make it seem that there are problems in the party when there’s none especially at this time and in a pre election period?  Taking this non issue and using it to her advantage!

Mr Eastmond, Miss Mottley and Miss Cynthia Forde – who has made it clear that she is backing Mr. Eastmond – have all served at one time or the other on the Executive of the Party and has held high positions in that respect, they obviously know the Constitution.  I thought that this lesson was that no man or woman is bigger than the party. And so it seems that it will have to be taught all over again.  Let me state that this gentleman and these two ladies have always impressed me. I have always had the utmost respect for their views and therefore I trusted them at all times because I have been around the politics of Barbados. This is just to show how I have rated them and I am sure that I can speak for many other Barbadians that share the same view. They have demonstrated their authority not only in Cabinet but also in Opposition, that is why I have found  it so hard to accept the position  that Mr. Eastmond has placed himself in after such a distinguished twenty years of service, not only to this country but to his constituency. Why add a blemish by brawling with his branch over a non issue? Then I ask myself where is the pride?

The Opposition Leader Owen Arthur has made it clear what the constitution states what is required to be a candidate. There should be a nomination every time there is a new election. This is the constitution of the party and he has ruled on it, case closed. The leader has gone on record as saying that Mr. Eastmond on several occasions had indicated he was on longer interested in being a candidate for the area. (Nation News Paper 31 January 2012 page 4). Also an executive member of the branch, Ms. Barbara Butler in the Nation News paper 30th January 2012 page 3 stated that they were not informed (Executive) that Mr. Eastmond was well enough to run in the upcoming elections therefore persons express interest in seeking  nomination and the branch machinery was put in motion. It now seems that  Mr Eastmond has a new surge of  energy  and  is interested once again in being the nominee for the party  forgetting that others have entered the fray. I want to urge him to forget the padded list that he is so much engulf with and is using as an excuse not to face his opponents in the nomination run off. Rawle you break it now fix it.

After serving a constituency for twenty years I find it hard for you not to have a base where that is base now it’s needed? You have stated that the branch is made up of about seven hundred members therefore my friend if you at this stage can’t ferry your supporters to the nomination on the evening in order to defeat your opponents like so many others have done, then it is probably time for you to hold your head up high knowing that you have served with continuants and your country with great distinction and be proud of yourself and leave as your predecessor did when he left.


135 thoughts on “Shame On You Rawle!

  1. old onion bags, true to form

    I admire the way you two are taking the fight to these Dems. I aint able with dem at all, just know that I read the blogs twice a day and I have your backs. But this “too-ing and fro-ing” with the DLP diehards on this blog aint for me! Keep the faith, bro/sis, we shall prevail!

    • @Prodigal Son

      old onion bags, true to form

      I admire the way you two are taking the fight to these Dems. I aint able with dem at all, just know that I read the blogs twice a day and I have your backs. But this “too-ing and fro-ing” with the DLP diehards on this blog aint for me! Keep the faith, bro/sis, we shall prevail!

      What are you saying that you would prefer statements made by BLPites are not challenged by others?

      Do you appreciate that those challenging those statements maybe Independents?

      Don’t you want to use persuasive arguments to convince undecideds?

      What is there in preaching to the converted?

  2. @ Prodigal
    Its a pleasure being on the front and a piece-a cake when you only have to speak the truth.They just mud slingers..harmless jesters hoping for another term.But you see middle class Bajans have been forced to live on their savings (cuts in real income)..but their savings are quickly running out..they can’t take much more…something got to will be this “guvaarnment.”…who honestly believed you could pay MORE TAXES with LESS INCOME.

    Oh ac give it a rest. I know your style too well now..(forget Ax?)..stop working a non issue..after dis Mia has two choices..and I am sure she only has the guts to do one.

    Oonions D ole Dawg

  3. @rotten onion

    how did the public service get back so large? why did osa passed the 2007 public service act?

  4. DO you believe that somebody going to vote for Freundel Stuart as Prime Minister???
    WASNT it said that Breee St.John was ah honest man to’ ???

    JUST ASKING in a combination with

  5. but wait a minute wasn’t the economy in full swing when OSA was ousted with OSA at that helm? Pause!

  6. Wait you mean I went had a haircut , a sea bath eat a coucou and steam
    travali, fire 2 rums wid my here eating pistachio nuts open BU and not one decent postulation put forward by a DLP-ite(not termite) for me worthwhile of my reply…chez.zonnnn..
    OH IMPORTANT NEWS>>> one of my buddies inform Mr Michael.Holder works for Carters & Co.Ltd.. one of the island’s main importer of GUNS….as head importermerchandiser (common sense should have told us cuz dem did all NEW looking guns and some machine guns in there also)…so what is all the blow out about….? Clever distractions and dirty politics….. by.blow hards

  7. @ Blogger 2012
    Because the Dems in restructuring agencies hired more people than they fired or made redundant combined.

    “people are going to be more focus on what is happening NOW in the PARTY and going to decide if the future of the country is worth having a leader whose house is not in ORDER.”

    The Dems’ house in order? lmfao

  8. Dear David:

    Do you know whether the BLP ever paid Desmond Bourne (aka on this blog as Bonny Peppa) for his election winning “Goin’ with Owen” slogan? Or did they let him go to his grave broke?

  9. cuh dear Random T the embattled BLP leader at least could have thrown jive talking Desmond a piece of loose change from the $70,000 he get from CLICO and Parris.
    Tell me again what OSA did with that money.

  10. @ February
    How much DT paid the pollster for the 2008 slogan? After all the cheques he got from CLICO was many times $75k.

  11. Barbados Today has an article titled “Hit the Road Rawle” in which it records the thoughts of some disgruntled constituents which strikes me as very similar to the story that the Nation ran a few weeks ago about Noel Lynch. From the heading of the report about Lynch and the comments one would have thought that he was in trouble but Lynch won 90-12 which only served to cement my thoughts that the credibility of the Nation is in the toilet.

    Anyway my homage to Hit the Road by one of my favourites.

  12. What I find to be malicious and very disturbing are comments attributed to Peter Wickham as carried in the online newspaper of Barbados Today. Indeed, it is offensive that Wickham would want to thrust on the people of St. James North, the BLP, and many Barbadians a vicious and vitriolic sense of a self-imposed logic which ferments with a satirical manipulation of facts and traditions. Wickham uses his self-belief that he possess a monopoly on political and electoral knowledge in little Barbados by claiming that “the assumption in both political parties has always been that if you hold a seat, you are the candidate unless otherwise stated.” Not only is Wickham’s statement based upon a total fabrication of the facts, but he goes on to suggest that Rawle Eastmond is being “victimised for his support for Mia Mottley.” Two things immediately jump out at me.
    For starters, and having followed most nominations in the BLP for at least a decade, incumbents wishing to continue to be candidates have put themselves at the behest of their branches; they have been nominated and seconded as part of a legitimate process that is articulated in the BLP’s constitution. Provided that there are no other nominations and the process closes, it is only then that such conclusion may be arrived at that allows for the declared candidate to maintain the privilege of contesting for a seat in the national assembly.
    Peter Wickham for reasons best known to him distorts the notion between conventions and the regulations dictating the candidate selection process of the BLP. Wickham says to Barbadians that the automatic endorsement of an incumbent without meeting the requirements of the valued constitutions of both political parties “has always been the tradition and once Eastmond has indicated that he is fit and able to contest the seat then there is reasonable logic that he should.” Whose logic are we witnessing; is it Wickham’s monopolistic logic? Considering the disquiet within the DLP in 2003 with Dr. David Estwick, one is likely to hazard a guess on the automatic ‘rubber-stamping’ of candidates in the DLP’s selection process.
    These things are important only if to demonstrate that Peter Wickham has an agenda that is certainly not about supporting the efficacy of democratic traditions; law and order; or calling for Rawle Eastmond to be a successful candidate in the next general election. In fact, if I was in Rawle’s position and I had read Wickham’s defence of my position, I would be very concerned.
    Of all the figurative, colloquialisms, and metaphoric expressions that form a part of Barbados’ culture, Wickham reduces Rawle Eastmond to being “the lowest hanging fruit in the Mottley basket.” What a shame! Wickham displays acidity towards persons of the BLP even without attempting to do so. While I do believe it may be out of character, I also recognise that changing circumstances may often alter one’s sense of civility. An interpretation of Wickham’s ranting in Barbados Today of February 2nd, 2012 leads one to speculate and visualise a real-life situation of political prostitution.
    Can you imagine that Peter Wickham dares to say that the BLP “is being perceived as a party at war” when in fact, he has long been attempting to write the genesis, intermediaries, and conclusions of any apparent conflict or disagreements for which he, through supposedly unbiased analyses, has come to define and ‘spin’ the statistics right across the Barbados political landscape.
    For whose cause does Wickham write, if on the one hand, all those he condemns happen to have the surnames Arthur and Stuart; and on the other hand, those he seemingly seeks to elevate in the eyes of a discerning public are Mottley and Sinckler? To suggest that “what you are seeing is an attempt to victimise him [Rawle Eastmond] for his support for Mottley” is as scandalous a statement made by any political scientist ever in Barbados.
    Wickham owes his profession a modicum of honesty and therefore he must come to the public with clean hands. Wickham must tell Barbados for what political position is Miss Mia Mottley contesting now or in the near future that she should be courting and/or expecting Rawle Eastmond’s support.
    Why should the political leader of the Barbados Labour Party, democratically and popularly positioned to lead given his past record and the current and overwhelming support he constantly receives, have “to make peace with Miss Mottley?” Surely, Mr. Peter Wickham, you are not expecting that the BLP will fail to rally around its leader if as you indicate there is a war and the Mottley basket is already hanging low?
    As far as I am aware, and in accordance with the laws of Barbados, there is only one Leader of the Opposition and that position as far as I can see will only again become vacant once the BLP reclaims the mantle of government in Barbados sometime within the next year or so. Miss Mottley held that position before; I would have thought her gaze would be looking forward and upward rather than backwards. Is Mottley in a war or competition for the position of Leader of the Opposition again; I hope not?
    Perhaps, and as the old people would say, Peter Wickham is too full of himself and he is taking his writing and ranting much too serious to the point that he is fast losing credibility, integrity, and a reasonable degree of objectivity. It is exactly why the people and things Wickham wants to speak about appear so very contradictory by Peter’s deduction that the Rawle Eastmond and St. James North episode is “completely illogical.”
    The firm leadership of Owen Arthur, with his correct decision not to become immersed in empty discussions and divisive schemes which may entrap him into stepping outside of the BLP’s constitutional provisions, is well supported by the majority of the members of parliament and by the ‘executive’ and ‘ordinary’ members of the BLP. The political leader of the Barbados Labour Party continues to provide profound disclosures on the directions for the advancement of the BLP and the people of Barbados.
    As a final word, both Rawle and Mia I consider to be good friends and political comrades undergirded with a similar social philosophy. If their actions and remonstrations are likely to divide more than they pull together or build, then their political futures may easily be exchanged one for the other. Should the political noose they have, with their own strengths or weaknesses, thrown above their heads become the last hurrah, then I too shall mourn their mortality.
    Without being disloyal to the institution for which I am a member and devoting myself to the cause rather than to the personalities, I expect that I shall grow and become freed from any potential conflict of interest, although this response may invite its own vindictive reprisals.
    Like those persons in St. James North, I have a right to choose who I shall support. I must say that I hope Peter Wickham does not get his wish; I hope that the nomination set for this Sunday comes off as another step towards the BLP’s mission of rescue, rebuild, and restore. Peter Wickham’s pitch is divisive and can only add to the woes of Eastmond, Mottley, and Sinckler; that is as sad as it is illustrative that hidden agendas do come with peace pacts!
    When Wickham stoops so low as to suggest that Arthur and Stuart are in collusion, I know for a fact that his shame may only be surpassed by the effects of political pantomime. Wickham’s analyses of late are lower than his proverbial spew of misinformation and lies which now hang lower than any basket for which he says Rawle is positioned and that Mia holds. What manner of man reduces himself to the flirtatious mockery in that pantomime?

  13. @ GCB
    Is this the same Peter Wickham who wanted us to change our stance on homosexuality… sought by the UK Minister.?..the same Wickham who had to vacate CBC for reasons unknown..? in DLP reign ? Wickham is back..attacking BLP…be careful of your bed-fellows Peter…watch your “BacK”.. especially when in st. James..that is if you care to…

  14. Word on the street is…People in St.James North go DUMP Rawle Eastmond come 5.00 pm this evening at this most important nomination for the constituency BLP candidate.
    As to Mia ..she go have to leave like a puppy wid tail between legs.
    Signs and wonders…signs and wonders….

Comments are closed.