@enuff

Not sure what his terms and conditions of employment of were at the time.

Enuff

Ministers do not have the power to hire or fire public officers or other public servants that are employed at statutory boards. However, even though they don’t have the power they exercise considerable influence in the case with statutory boards. They can and do give the boards instructions which the board members feel obligated to carry out. That is why so many boards face lawsuits for wrongful dismissal and have to pay out so much money, but what the hell it is not their money, so they don’t mind issuing unlawful instructions.

@ Sargeant | April 1, 2012 at 2:33 PM |
” Thompson’s hit wasn’t illegal but Mascoll’s credibility was tottering and Thompson used the equivalent of the rabbit punch that Foreman delivered to Frazier as he was on his way down in the title bout in Jamaica.”

Sarge, man, you got a real good memory. I will never forget that fight. Devastating it was! Foreman literarily lifted Frazier in mid-air with those punches. Those were not rabbit punches (just the one to the back of the head on his way down) but gorilla punches.
That fight will always stick in my memory. First time the miller was getting free food after waiting in the queue for over 3 years. Had to make a choice. Watch the fight or eat the food. Guess what the hungry miller did?

Sad the toll boxing takes on our bodies.

At the time those three guys, Foreman, Frazier and Ali were almost gods.

One guy claimed to be the greatest … and I guess he was … for a time.

well leroy parris wasn’t he part of the many infelicities . How come no charges has been brought against him after 4 years with the only flimsy charge of selling insurance. you guys talk a good talk with no evidence. don;t hold you breathe for such charges would not happen even if DT was alive. just wishful thinking and a lot of bull;;;;;sh

The PDC has been perusing an undated online paper by one G C Brathwaite – Changing state dynamics – erosion of democracy in Barbados.

We stumbled across this paper, as we were going through some articles – on line – dealing with some of the political history of Barbados.

That Brathwaite used to have his submissions published on the BU blog site, but for whatever reasons have not recently been having any published, is some thing we find a little mystifying.

But, like academic diggers that have come across something by one of our political opponents that is pertinent of censure and worthy of absolute criticism, and like social critics that have come across something that meretricously shows off as intelligent writing but that is itself far less than that, we have decided to use this opportunity – upon brushing off the hard crusty layers of academic pollution – to expose some BU readers to some of the infertile nonsense that Brathwaite has contained in the paper, with a primary view of showing them why this country is hardly going anywhere ideologically intellectually politically, sometimes because of many of those who are so-called practising intellectuals in this country and who would have been the beneficiaries of “free” education, having chosen to remain tightly confusedly stuck in many old useless 20th century ideological political paradigms and cockfights.

So, first of all, in this paper – Brathwaite portrays the false assumption that Barbados has been a democracy, albeit one that is eroding.

What piffle!!

Barbados has NEVER been a democracy. Barbados out of so many other appropriate definitions is an oligarchy – rule by a few.

For Brathwaite to suggest therefore that Barbados has been a democracy – which is rule by the majority of people in a polity- is illusory of him.

While he falsely contended that democracy is being eroded, we must state that this oligarchy is becoming more and more conditioned by many instances of corruption, lawlessness, anarchism and permissiveness on many social political cultural fronts. Of course these circumstances will have an adverse negative impact more on authority than liberty, more on cooperation than conflict in the country – in the long term with greater threats to traditional authority and conformity.

While Brathwaite variously interchanges use of the term “erosion of democracy”, with use of the term “threat to erosion of democracy”, in some of earlier parts of the paper, thus creating confusion in the mind of the critical reader/thinker about what is really the theme of the paper, it is certainly not interesting that the powerlessness that he so ascribes to this Barbados “democracy” that is in flux, is markedly a consequence of local and international oligarchic conditions – and not democratic growth from oligary even.

Another fundamental error that that he makes, and which obviously has come through pure instinctual belief – not research – is that, he wrote that Tourism is the leading contributor to GDP in 2004/5 (presumably this is the time when that part of/the whole paper was written – in the paper itself he makes reference to Barbados celebrating its 39th year of nationhood). Research of the relevant Central Bank data would however indicate that the tourism sector although the no 1 foreign exchange earning sector, at the time, was the third biggest contributor to GDP – and not the leading sector.

NB. We fundamentally believe however that GDP must take into consideration only productive activity – and not services activity. We no longer lump together the value of physical output with the value of services.

PDC

PDC
So, first of all, in this paper – Brathwaite portrays the false assumption that Barbados has been a democracy, albeit one that is eroding.

What piffle!!

Barbados has NEVER been a democracy. Barbados out of so many other appropriate definitions is an oligarchy – rule by a few.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ut

Barbados is a democracy but democracy needs testing now and again.

What better way than for an individual citizen/policyholder (or a group) to seek to use the courts as is their democratic right to call to account what amounts to no more than a bunch of conmen .

Why rely on Government when everyone alleges that the conmen are a part of Government.

Under normal circumstances the Government should do it but obviously no one has any confidence in Government.

It would be like a breath of fresh air.

Such a movement could spawn the future leaders of Barbados.

@ David

Do you appreciate the fact that Chris Sinckler, leader of the Eager 11 was motivated into action as a result of the very CRUEL blow (delivered by the PM) of removing the responsibility for Nation Insurance Scheme from Ministry of Finance and Economic Affairs and that since then NIS has undertaken major investments such as the new CXC building and Four Season?

Do you appreciate that this was clearly an attempt by the PM and or his kitchen Cabinet to limited the power, financial and otherwise of the Minister of Finance thereby ensuring that all construction projects were NOT awarded to the Bjerkham Group namely JADA, PRECONCO, SIGMA and CARIBBEAN HOMES?

Do you appreciate why the action of the Eager 11 was promoted by BJERKHAM, TEMPRO and MALONEY And why the meeting was convened in an apartment at Sapphire Beach Apartments in Dover belonging to BJERKHAM and TEMPRO?

Do you appreciate that the Prime Minister is aware of the very close relationship between BJERKHAM Group and Minister Sinckler?

Do you appreciate the roll of Minister Sealy in ensuring that ALL contractors in Barbados, irrespective of perceived party affiliation, should be given a slice of the GOB’s capital works programme as a method of protecting business in a harsh economic climate which carries with it attendant benefits such as maintaining employment levels in Barbados.

Why does the Minister of Finance believe that BJERKHAM is GOD and should be the recipient of ALL government contracts, is because he can multiply loaves and bread and feed many?