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.

← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

Submitted by Phoenix
BLP promises to rollback VAT to 15%

Barbados was introduced to an increase in Value Added Tax on 1st December 2010  by Minister of Finance Chris Sinckler. According to the economic review of the first six months of 2012 released by the Central Bank of Barbados in July 2012, provisional estimates for the 2011-2012 fiscal year are that VAT brought in BDS$949.6 million dollars into the Treasury. On a whole, VAT contributed BDS$764.8 million of the BDS$1.2 billion in indirect taxes taken in by government last year – Read more.

The leader of Her Majesty’s Opposition, Mr. Owen. Arthur, at the recent BLP Convention held in the Queens Park, informed all, of a sure reversal of the 2.5 % Vat increase,  when his party wins the next elections. This revelation has already left many DLP supporters in shock and awe, for they know such relief would only spell  their demise. This welcomed and empathic committal, would take much of the burdensome strain off the backs of the  people, and will bring true meaning to the DLP’s empty rant. “A community, not  just an economy.”

So why is it that the DLP on coming to power, back in January 2008, with Foreign Reserves to the tune of $2.4 Billon, found it necessary two years later, to slap on a 2.5% increase in Vat? Not only did they collect an additional $100 Million approx. each year for four (4) years, but there was also the jaunty boast by the Minister of Finance Sinckler of $120 Million collected in excess last year. Excessive collections at the expense of increased unemployment, increased food prices, poor quality drugs and an overall decline in the standard of living of all Barbadians. Today, it begs the question was the increase really necessary? Why is it that we are seeing all the large scale extraction of monies from the people, yet no commensurate asset worth to show?

Vat continues to deliver lashes on the people. Lashes so hot and concuss, when delivered in tandem with $400 Million collected on fuel by the BNOC, has left an all but broken spirited people with nothing to pay their increased water and electricity bills. Really now, what was this current administration thinking? Given that the amount was said to be excess and ‘unexpected’, would it not have made more sense in the last Budget to have given it back in the form of relief? How could their “dearly beloved,” people now completely impoverish by these draconian measures, be expected to cope, far less give them another 5 year term to further the inefficacious?  Indeed Mr. Arthur,  we are waiting. Free the infirmed people from this obvious lamprey. Revamp and give new meaning to Observer’s commensurate calypso “Cat Attack“ Vat Attack. Relief is long overdue and very much needed; do so before anymore lose  their wits ends and succumb to this millstone.


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

110 responses to “Vat Recall”

  1. Carson C. Cadogan Avatar
    Carson C. Cadogan

    All are welcome to the DLP meeting this evening at Foundation School.


  2. @Pat,
    I am not disappointed in Lewis Hamilton. I am disappointed that he did not finish.
    It is not his fault that McLaren engineers keep making mistakes.

    He has made the right move to leave.

  3. Carson C. Cadogan Avatar
    Carson C. Cadogan

    I cant understand how some people let the barbados Labour Party fool them time and again.

    The Barbados Labour Party was to roll back the Amendments to constitution of 1973, they have been in office many times since with no roll back.

    The Barbados Labour Party was to privatise CBC when they came to power in the early nineties. Never did.

    The Barbados Labour Party was to modernise the Libel laws when they came to power in the early nineties, never did.

    The Barbados Labour Party was to issued additional TV licences when they came to power in the early nineties. Never did.


  4. David “The issue will always be how can an Opposition promise anything if it is not fully apprised of the state of the treasury?”

    I don’t believe that. The BLP know what they left and Government spending information is public knowledge.
    They can’t be so stupid not to “do the math”

    As you know David tiefing is not done by taking cash out of the treasury.

    It COULD be done by using foreign contractors for “big projects and cost overruns is the slush fund for deposits in Miami, New York, Toronto and places unknown.

  5. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ David:

    What you are saying makes practical sense. The current Opposition except for Owen Arthur’s short period as leader in the 1991-94 session was never “trained’ in the art of opposition politics.
    The current DLP administration on the other hand had plenty of time to perfect the craft. Presumably they have learnt their lesson of making unrealistic promises when in opposition as was done in the January 2008 elections and permanently recorded in the DLP manifesto and forever etched in the annals of political unrealism and opportunism.

    We will await the coming manifestoes and rate them against the test of economic realities.

    BTW, do you think any of the parties will have the guts to make written promises of integrity legislation and freedom of information again?

    We notice the rather poor journalism being displayed when the PM speaks and being interviewed by the timid mediocre press on the current campaign trail. Is the press only interested in scandal and hearsay?
    Why isn’t he being asked if the international recession is also responsible for the breaking of his promise of enacting Integrity and FoI legislation in the current life of this parliament?

  6. Carson C. Cadogan Avatar
    Carson C. Cadogan

    Keep quiet, Kerry!!!


  7. @Miller

    Leadership does not require popularity. The BLP has the opportunity to snatch the transparency legislation debate from the government who obviously lacks the will enact it. The challenge for the BLP is that Mia is the only BLPite who has the bank balance not to care about amassing personal wealth.


  8. We need to have an honest debate about the prospects and options for our economy without the political posturing and gamesmanship. It is obvious to a blind man that government expenditure must be trimmed if we are to see our way out of this crisis.

    A policy of over-taxation in order to control consumer spending on foreign goods and therefore protect our foreign reserves is short-sighted and is demonstrably not working. Just look at our foreign reserves leakage over the last four years, despite the government’s tax policy.

    The best way forward will must include a mix of policies including reduction of public expenditure, tax reduction to stimulate the economy and the rekindling of the productive sectors. There must also be encouragement of import substitution with a special emphasis on agriculture. Perhaps we need also to look at again our offshore oil assets.

    This requires national consensus, but these issues (especially cutting public expenditure) must be depoliticised if there is to be significant “buy-in” on the part of the public. I am sure that if called upon, the public as well as all the civil institutions, the private sector, labour and the political parties could come up with many creative and amazing solutions to our problems. Ordinary, simple people may very well come up with the best ideas.

    What is needed, though, is governmental leadership towards these ends; something that is sorely lacking at the moment.

  9. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ Anthony | November 4, 2012 at 2:12 PM |
    “I think it counter productive. Vat compounds from first landing till it reach the consumer but what can we do about it now?”

    I beg to disagree with you, Anthony.
    VAT is a tax on the final total cost plus mark-up to the consumer. Unless other duties and taxes are eliminated they will and must be included in the final price to the consumer before the imposition of the VAT. What the importer pays at the port of entry is the input VAT on purchases which by definition must include all costs and charges up to the point of delivery to the warehouse; (treatment of transportation or inward freight can be debated but the associated VAT will be treated as input VAT). The importer is allowed to claim back any input VAT so as to avoid the burden but only if the business is VAT registered. Even if the business is not registered or the imported product does not qualify for input tax treatment then the business will pass on the un-reclaimable tax to the consumer in the final selling price.
    Whichever method or view you adopt the duties and taxes will attract VAT at any stage if the VAT mechanism or machinery is to remain efficient.

    What do you say, Anthony?


  10. @davidb
    Well said

    @david
    The blp has already sounded the trumpets of good governance and freedom of information. Almost farcical considering their last 4 years but unbelievably plausible given the DLP’s inaction and emepty rhetoric. Go figure.


  11. @DavidB

    What do you mean stimulating the economy?

    Do you mean creating forex generating projects?

    Remember it is about sustainability.


  12. millertheanunnaki wrote “Why isn’t he being asked if the international recession is also responsible for the breaking of his promise of enacting Integrity and FoI legislation in the current life of this parliament?”

    When did PM Freundel Stuart mke thiat promise?


  13. @ miller

    I mean in term of componding for consumer. If it pass thru 3 entities. each entitiy has its markup and charge the other vat. that mean vat value is compounded with the markup. In the end companies may pay very little vat due to input and output level but consumer get the markup + compounded vat.


  14. @ miller

    what haste in the alexander . it took almost 12 years to bring the AX problem to an inquiry . What haste !stupese………….and the other questions i will ignore since you have a way of being disingenuous in about everything to make a point

  15. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ DavidB | November 4, 2012 at 2:45 PM |
    “The best way forward will must include a mix of policies including reduction of public expenditure, tax reduction to stimulate the economy and the rekindling of the productive sectors.”

    So let’s continue the debate. Are you implying that privatization of most state enterprises is a ‘sine qua non’ in order to achieve that necessary objective so clearly identified and eloquently put by you?

    “Perhaps we need also to look at again our offshore oil assets.”

    This no longer on the cards. Leave the little reserve of exceedingly heavy crude where it is. Why disturb an old carbon sink? The releasing of the genie out of the offshore bottle will only spell unimaginable socio-economic and environmental problems for this country.
    In any event, who will invest in offshore drilling for very heavy crude that can only be processed offshore as fuel oil some of which will be re-imported at world market prices? Where is the profit incentive when there is an overabundance of light crude oil on the world market?

    Do we intend to continue burning fossil fuels for our electricity needs? Isn’t this in contradiction to the government’s policy of renewable and alternative energy solutions to our energy requirements? What about it’s much touted ‘greening’ credentials?


  16. millertheanunnaki wrote “Do we intend to continue burning fossil fuels for our electricity needs?.”

    Solar powered will be introduced to Barbados by a friend of a friend of the Owner’s of Emera.
    Trust me. It is the Canadian way

  17. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ Hants | November 4, 2012 at 2:56 PM |
    “When did PM Freundel Stuart mke thiat promise?”

    Hants, PM Freundel Stuart took over the mandate given to the DLP in January 2008 under the leadership of David Thompson. Included in the mandate given to the DLP by the people was the required provision to enact Integrity and FoI legislation. He, Freundel Stuart, by his own actions has acquiesced to the mandate and has taken ownership by his own refusal to call early elections after succeeding DT.

    Moreover it was just a few months ago the PM was quizzed on the same matter and he made it crystal clear that Integrity Legislation will be debated and passed by Parliament before the end of this sitting of Parliament.

    And Hants, David BU can attest to this promise made by the PM. This not the miller speaking out of his ascribed” BLP mouth” and much maligned on this blog. This is straight from the mouth of the then sleeping Integrity Giant himself. Why do you think he is so aptly called Mr. Integrity from Molasses Hill?


  18. @Miller

    You are correct.


  19. http://www.caribbeanelections.com/barbados/resources/manifesto_dlp_08/manifesto_dlp_08.pdf

    Page 26 in the pdf, 48 in real document
    “Immediately introduce integrity legislation
    requiring
    • a declaration of assets by public officials,
    • a Code of Conduct for Ministers,
    • a new Freedom of Information law,
    • amendments to the Defamation laws and
    • new constitutional provisions to rationalise
    the powers of the Prime Minister.”

    I think we long gone past immediately.

  20. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ Hants | November 4, 2012 at 3:25 PM |
    “Solar powered will be introduced to Barbados by a friend of a friend of the Owner’s of Emera. Trust me. It is the Canadian way”

    Stop talking nonsense, Hants! So what will they do with their recently acquired $380 million or so massive investment in a generation plant dependent on imported fossil fuels? Treat it as a tax write-off against whose income for Revenue Canada to allow?


  21. @Miller

    If EMERA has this technology in house already ie receiving power into their grid why would they not retrofit their plant to align with emerging technology?


  22. @anthony 4:10
    what was amazing was that it was claimed that the EXISTING code of conduct for parliamentarians was enough. Nothing else needed.

    @David 4:35
    is it in their best interests or profit generating?

    @miller
    The dlp have hung themselves on FOI and IL. There’re many other pieces of rope but those two are some of the thickest. Unbelievably the “allegedly corrupt” BLP will ride in and proclaim that they will “save the day” by enacting it. Poor politics on the DLP side.

    Just observing


  23. @ Miller and Anthony

    I accept the idea that in commercial sales ‘value’ will be determined by the expense incurred in importing goods including ‘ancillary’ taxes. There will thus be a knock-on affect to the consumer. And yes, VAT may be reclaimed. But what of the ordinary fella – me, you – who import for personal consumption only. There is no ‘added value’ as a consequence of additional tax expenses – only added losses. Until someone says to me ‘Oh it’s section something or other of the so-and-so Act the ghost of the Great Case of Ship money will ever rear its head.

    It all reminds me of the Occupational Pension Benefits Act where government insisted that only 25% of a pension lump sum could be paid as the result of the Act’s provisions and the remainder was to be put into an annuity – until a bright spark did some law with the Financial Services Commission which finally accepted (by public notice of 26 June) that all along they, and the Minister, had got it wrong.

  24. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ Anthony | November 4, 2012 at 3:02 PM |

    It is totally incompetently stupid for any government revenue and tax collection system to have an import duties and taxes system running along a VAT system. Except for high value luxury finished luxury goods like high end motor cars, alcohol, clothing and jewellery. To have this blatant distortion is to corrupt and promote the inefficiency of the VAT machinery and imposes an unjustifiable burden of the consumers and by extension the financially disadvantaged sections of the society.

    If the Government is really concerned about the VAT burden on the poor then it needs to eliminate duties on all items except the excess duty on luxury items than can be called a Luxury Item Tax. In addition the government needs to enforce the provisions of the VAT legislation and prosecute those who continuously breach the regulations regarding correct application and timing of payment to the Central Revenue Authority of the tax taken from the same ‘poor’ people and others instead of fiddling with the rate of tax willy-nilly to misguidedly make up for shortfalls in projected revenues.

  25. Carson C. Cadogan Avatar
    Carson C. Cadogan

    DLP meeting at Foundation School.

    http://www.ustream.tv/channel/dlpbarbados


  26. @millertheanunnaki,

    90% of what I write on BU is intended to be mildly provocative and a lot of it is off the cuff b e.
    However, you should not presume that all of it is “nonsense”

    millertheanunnaki wrote

    “So what will they do with their recently acquired $380 million or so massive investment in a generation plant dependent on imported fossil fuels?”

    That is a very good question. If it was in Ontario,Canada they would disassemble the equipment, put it on flat bed trailers and move it to a new location.
    They could put it on a ship and send it to anywhere they need to.

    Come to think of it they could ship equipment from Barbados to their next power plant in the Caribbean.

    But doan mine me. I gine stop talkin nonsense before Bushie and GP come and put me in my intellectual place.


  27. @ Anthony
    Income since 2008 : 10.1 billion bds
    Expense since 2008 : 13.4 billion bds
    Net loss since 2008 : 3.4 billion bds

    ———–
    Could you simplify it for us…Would you say $3.4 Billion loss ( expenditure over income) as a result of no in flows yet from WIP construction projects?… Or could it be considered as a result of less than astute money resources management or even over shooting budgets? How much of that expenses would you estimate went towards incomplete project?.

    Your revenue from Vat $ 3.7 Bill….not to far from estimate $4 Bill nor my assessment of the dire financial position of $5.6 Bill to be accounted for

    Loss……………………..$3.4 Billion
    Interest payments…..$2.1 Billion,,,,,,,, (Dodds Prison loan and others)

    Total……………………..$5.5 Billion

    In the mist of all these monies collected from Vat… Is it possible to find out was BORROWED since 2008 would complete the picture, don’t you think?

    Thanks for the stats supplied todate…..most informative.


  28. To understand the need for VAT you really need to go back to the bad old days before 1997. We had different import taxes coming out of the “kazoo”. High customs duties on many items, a luxury tax, a consumption tax which climbed for about 4% in the late seventies to 21% by the time VAT was introduced. In many cases, these taxes amounted to well over 100% increase in the cost of many imported items. By introducing VAT, it was possible to remove all these differenet and difficult-to-collect taxes and levies and impose one tax to replace them. At the same time, most items had customs duties reduced to the Common External Tariff (CET) level of 20%. VAT had the advantage of being spread to every area of commercial activity, and therefore could be applied at a lower level than was being charged before. The other advantage was that it made commercial entities responsible for collecting and reporting the tax. The fact that many do not do so is not the fault of the tax, but the administration of it. A VAT audit is a very onerous thing for any small businessman, and often they are dealt with unfairly, whilst large and complicated businesses will never be audited because it’s just too difficult for the Customs VAT division to handle.
    Finally, if and when VAT is reduced, don’t hold your collective breath waiting for a reduction in prices. The commercial sector in Barbados is well practiced in not passing-on such reductions. The only thing a reduction will stimulate is the bottom lines of the commercial sector.

  29. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ Peltdownman | November 5, 2012 at 7:40 AM
    “Finally, if and when VAT is reduced, don’t hold your collective breath waiting for a reduction in prices.”

    So what are you implying here; that merchants will continue to charge VAT @17.5% instead of the reduced rate? Are you saying that so-called educated Bajan shoppers would look at their shopping bills and don’t realise that the merchants have not changed the rate of VAT?

    What are saying here, man?


  30. What I am saying is that, in many cases, the extra 2.5 % will be used to pad out the merchants’ bottom lines. They cannot continue to charge VAT at 17.5% – that would be illegal. It’s just that they will collect VAT at 15% but not reduce their prices accordingly. It happened when VAT was introduced in 1997 and it will most likely happen again.

  31. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ Peltdownman | November 5, 2012 at 9:21 AM |

    What you are saying does not make any sense so far. The reduction in the VAT rate does not affect the price charged by the merchant (actual selling price before VAT). It affects (reduces) the amount of tax to be collected by the merchant on behalf of government.

    What could have happened with the introduction of the VAT in 1997 is that the other duties and taxes the VAT was designed to replace were indeed included in the old price build-up that determined the selling price to consumers. It is highly probable and I would agree with you that many merchants took advantage of consumers and refused to adjust their cost price accordingly when the duties and other taxes were eliminated.

    They therefore went ahead and imposed the new VAT rate of 15% on the old selling prices without a commensurate downward adjustment in the price build up on any new inventories to reflect the fact that the old duties and taxes were no longer relevant or paid by the merchants.
    A future change in the VAT rate will not be occurring in such a scenario.

    Do you agree or are you calling the merchants a bunch of crooks? Those who collect VAT from consumers but refuse to pay it over to Government can be so aptly described but you can’t use a tar brush to paint the entire distribution and retail sector.


  32. @Peltdownman

    You are correct about merchant pricing approaches in Barbados. It is up to people to rise up. That time will come soon when the straw breaks the camel’s back.


  33. @ Peltdownman
    Surprisingly, it is more often than not the smaller business houses who are guilty immediately following…larger companies more follow after a lag….Here is where Min of Comm…Price Control Officers should be more proactive….policing mechanisms suck in BIM…..


  34. I would appear that Miller just doesn’t understand what I have been stating. After VAT is reduced, the guilty merchants won’t be collecting 17.5% VAT, they will collecting 15% VAT, but their prices won’t be reduced to account for the reduction in tax. This is not illegal, it does not make them crooks, but it is par for the course in Barbados. I am not accusing the complete sector, I am just pointing out what happens in many cases, and it has happened in the past, because maximizing profits is every businessman’s job. Personally, because of this fact, I would rather see the extra 2.5% VAT retained by government and used to seriously upgrade this country’s attraction to potential visitors. I’m not holding my breath on that either!

  35. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ Peltdownman | November 5, 2012 at 10:17 AM |
    “After VAT is reduced, the guilty merchants won’t be collecting 17.5% VAT, they will collecting 15% VAT, but their prices won’t be reduced to account for the reduction in tax. This is not illegal, it does not make them crooks, but it is par for the course in Barbados.”

    We are still at a loss here to appreciate the gist of your argument or assertion? Are you referring to the price charged by merchants before the imposition of the adjusted VAT rate or the price after the adjusted of the VAT rate.
    Maybe from the illustration below you might be able to further enlighten us:

    (1) Price structure under existing VAT rate:
    Price of item before VAT: $10.00 (inclusive of merchants mark-up or profit margin)
    VAT charged@ 17.5% $ 1.75
    Total price $ 11.75 paid by consumer on shown on receipt

    (2) Price structure under a reduced VAT rate:
    Price of item before VAT: $10.00 (inclusive of merchants mark-up or profit margin)
    VAT charged@ 15% $ 1.50
    Total price $ 11.50 paid by consumer and shown on receipt

    From the above how would the “crooked” merchant collect the reduced tax but the price to the consumer remains the same or increases unless the merchant increases the basic selling price of $10.00? If the price of the item is not controlled by the government can you tell us how you can stop the merchants from increasing their base prices in a ‘free market’ economy other than shopping at so-called honest merchant houses? “Caveat emptor’ is still the watchword for keen shoppers like you, peltdownman; even where there is another hoax in the making. But don’t blame the reduction in the VAT rate as the cause of the merchant’s gross dishonesty or abuse of the laws of supply and demand.


  36. @Miller

    You are over analyzing. All Peltdowman is saying is that merchants will retain price levels by padding the 2.5 % (if VAT is rolled back) in the mark-up.

  37. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ David | November 5, 2012 at 11:37 AM |

    So what will happen if the rate is increased to 20% as recommended by the IMF?

    All you are saying is that the merchants in Barbados, by and large, are a group of rapacious, selfish and exploitative parasites with little or no concern for or commitment to the general society or country. Are you, now?

    BTW, do you have access to a copy of the speech delivered by MoF Chris Sinckler to the BCCI luncheon in May 2011 and which Ms Mottley made reference to in her recent media conference?


  38. @ Miller

    OSA is asking the DLP politicians to declare their assets. OSA has been in politics for 30 years, why did he only declare his assets in 2008 when he had formally retired from party politics?

    The assets declared from OSA includes the $75,000.00, seventy-five thousand dollars belonging to the BLP that ended up in his FCIB bank account?


  39. @ ac = Oxford Direct
    You still dodging and hiding….by the OSA Ghost following you all bout….. if you don’t even understand CIVICS….you cannot make worth while contributes in politics….wait wha OSA do you doa….what is you first name B?

  40. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ Oxford Direct | November 5, 2012 at 12:15 PM |

    OSA might be asking the DLP but what about the DLP promises to the nation in January 2008?
    Well let me directly remind!

    “The Democratic Labour Party will also:
    Immediately introduce integrity legislation
    requiring
    • a declaration of assets by public officials,
    • a Code of Conduct for Ministers,
    • a new Freedom of Information law,
    • amendments to the Defamation laws and
    new constitutional provisions to rationalise
    the powers of the Prime Minister.”

    We don’t expect you to respond to this one. If you, do we will give you
    $ 34 million plus $3.333 million plus interest as a gratuity for honouring your commitment and promises to the people.


  41. @Miller
    “All you are saying is that the merchants in Barbados, by and large, are a group of rapacious, selfish and exploitative parasites with little or no concern for or commitment to the general society or country. Are you, now?”

    If the cap fits

  42. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ Peltdownman | November 5, 2012 at 12:58 PM |
    “If the cap fits”

    There is some element of truth in that repartee.
    Especially if you include the government in the mix through its ownership of the BNOC. Imagine charging electricity consumers, that is, all of us, world market prices plus mark-up plus taxes to charge VAT on fuel oil a third of which is from the local oil wells.

    So the DLP proposal to lower the COL was just pie-in-the-sky hot air.

  43. DR. THE HONOURABLE Avatar
    DR. THE HONOURABLE

    Oxford Direct | November 5, 2012 at 12:15 PM |
    @ Miller

    OSA is asking the DLP politicians to declare their assets. OSA has been in politics for 30 years, why did he only declare his assets in 2008 when he had formally retired from party politics?

    The assets declared from OSA includes the $75,000.00, seventy-five thousand dollars belonging to the BLP that ended up in his FCIB bank account?

    NONSENSE
    NONSENSE
    NONSENSE
    LIES
    LIES
    LIES
    STOP THE FOLLY


  44. Anyone heard Kellman admit today that the energy prices help run NCO out of Barbados and that the offer of solar energy couldn’t sway the company? And again he spoke about increased exports…Jesus take the wheel.


  45. The DLP is a bunch of clowns who don’t know what they are doing? But then again Fruendel admits that he was sleeping and now woke up but he like he gone back to sleep. There was a company that came to barbados in 2006 named Alpha making bottles. The company was run by bajans with support from head office in Puerto Rico. Alpha was exporting bottles to the entire caribbean and as far as Aruba. The company only had two customers in Barbados and was operating 7 days a week and doing good business exporting and bringing in foreign exchange. This cannot be disputed because the records are there at the BIDC for all to see. The price of electricity started to rise really high and in the company sought an audience with the DLP government in 2009 but got no response from anyone. After becoming fustrated the company packed up and moved out of Barbados. It is being said that the reason company got no response from the DLP government was because a former employer of a certain senator/minister was pushing the government not to offer any concessions as it related to the electricity to the bottle company because they wanted the bottle company to shut down and then they would apply to the DLP government to bring in their bottles from outside of Barbados duty free which would be cheaper than buying them in barbados. So to satisfy the greed of this beverage company no one met with the bottle company and hence ithe company close and instead of foreign exchange coming into the country by way of all the exports that this bottling company was doing we are now sending foreign exchange out to bring in bottle.
    Shame on the sleeping giant and the DLP.


  46. @ Enuff
    Kellman is the one who said Manufacturing increased by 20 % in 6 mths…again we ask him manufacturing WHAT? …and where ?
    Who else but Kellman like Hutson to run off annuda IBC …..NCO employed 1200+ bajans school leavers and has been here for 10 years……sleeping Kellman just lucky St.Lucy is ona DEM safe seats….the lil short man….really just likes to talk shoite on VOB and cause even the flyin fish to up and gone now….Kellman where D fish you promised us?


  47. @ David

    “David B
    What do you mean stimulating the economy? Do you mean creating forex generating projects? Remember it is about sustainability.”
    ==============================

    Of course it’s about sustainability, but it is also about doing in the short term what is needed to breathe life into the virtually dead economy.

    The plan has to address short-term, medium-term and long-term growth.

    The process need to be managed to avoid depleting the foreign reserves too quickly, as the longer term more sustainable actions are put in place.


  48. @DavidB

    You have identified the problem now unless you are Mascoll there are multiple suggestion how to fix it.

    On 6 November 2012 01:03, Barbados Underground


  49. @old onion bags,

    Companies will move from Barbados to increase their profitability.
    Cheap labour and freedom to hide profits is what these companies are looking for.

    Do you know where the Prime Minister of Canada is?

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