Government Needs to Protect Small Businesses

Adrian Loveridge - Owner of Peach & Quiet Hotel

Adrian Loveridge – Owner of Peach & Quiet Hotel

Perhaps more than many, I can empathise with individuals who have recently seen their business either fail or brought dangerously close to insolvency. In 47 years it has happened to me twice and in both cases, they were largely external forces which caused near personal financial catastrophe.

Of course, it is easy to attribute the blame to others but in my case, I can unequivocally state that both near failures, which occurred years apart, were largely caused by strike action in the United Kingdom. Both involving the National Union of Seaman. Personally witnessing bus loads, of what can only be described as pickaxe wielding thugs, destroying property and intimidating ordinary people simply wanting to go about everyday work and operating their businesses.

More than a decade later, it was the same union, blockading the English channel ports, which prevented literally thousands of our booked holidaymakers taking their hard earned trips.

Unless you have been a small entrepreneur and fully understand the work, sacrifice and dedication it takes to grow and nurture a business from nothing, it might be difficult to comprehend the feeling of sheer devastation you experience, when all those efforts unfold and collapse in front of you.

When we moved to Barbados, some twenty five years ago, and literally put our life savings into purchasing a derelict hotel, we were starting all over again. Not surprising, the local banks we approached were not overly helpful, regularly quoting those seemingly worldly phrases like – we were ‘undercapitalised’ or ‘over trading’. Little did we know then, that these ‘pearls of wisdom’ would come back and haunt the many supposedly ‘responsible’ financial institutions, globally, just years later.

In those early days, understandably, very few suppliers were prepared to extend us credit, and we will be eternally grateful to the handful who took the risk. In hindsight, the limited access to borrowing and credit was probably the best thing that happened to us. Growth of the business and enhancement of plant was funded by positive cashflow, which left us entirely debt free.

Therefore, while I have absolute sympathy for those enterprises which have faced critical financial challenges recently, you are forced to ask if Government is now operating a two tier system of collecting taxes, when a relatively small company can amass outstanding debts of close to a reported $10 million, across four Government agencies.

Something has to be fundamentally wrong.

Our own experiences substantiate this inequity, after finally receiving partial payment of outstanding VAT refunds overdue for as long as three years and seven months.

Clearly any administration has to adopt a balancing act of trying to create a climate where enterprises are encouraged to grow and help soak up unemployment. But at the same time, they should not escape their regulatory responsibility by allowing selected corporate entities to avoid or even evade paying taxes for long periods of time. Ultimately, the businesses which are playing by the rules, despite all the adverse trading conditions, have to pick up any deficit.

  • @ PDC

    “minus the Barbadian’s contribution to running the schemes encompassing the banks, credit unions etc.”

    Barbadians will contribute to the fund to get free money from these financial institutions, but will not contribute to the provision of goods and services through taxation?

    Like

  • Inkwell………..you are too much……….

    Like

  • David wrote “is ok to be overseas and make noises, it is another to be in Barbados facing the music.”

    Are you saying that we overseas hyphenated Bajans should keep quiet ?

    Just so you know some of us more affected by what is happening in Barbados than what is happening where we currently live.

    Like

  • Carson C. Cadogan

    off topic

    Look how England wants to help us.

    Cameron wants to help build jails to repatriate foreign inmates

    THE British Government is to fund a prisonbuilding programme in poor countries, including Jamaica, in order to get more foreign inmates out of the UK, Prime Minister David Cameron announced late last week.

    Read more: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/UK-prison-plan#ixzz2RtRfc2pd

    Like

  • @Hants

    No and you know it.

    Like

  • @ David
    Bushie can understand the newbies entertaining “serious” discussion with PDC….but Cuhdear man…you must know better… 🙂

    @ Inkwell
    Thanks man!
    You explanation of the PDC position is even clearer this time around…
    After the PDC went quiet on BU, Bushie was thinking that Adamson had at last got the correct dosage of his medication sorted out…..
    Perhaps not.

    @ PDC
    One thing that Is of note is how much closer your policies have become to the other two main political parties. LOL, unfortunately it is not that yours have gotten any better…
    …shiite man, Arthur and Sinclair don’t sound any more rational than you do…

    BTW
    ….anyone heard Peter Wickham defending his gay agenda today on brass bowls…. sorry – Brass Tacks? ….easily the single most embarassingly disgusting episode on any public radio in Bushie’s personal experience.
    StarCom should be ashamed.

    Like

  • Carson…………..look at the bright side, the taxpayers will not have to spend money to build a new jail for all the corrupt lawyers and politicians in Bim when they finally have to pay, they will fit quite nicely into a new prison built by the British, with no VECO scandal attached………….how does that make you feel? you can go visit some of your current masters in the new prison when Karma catches up with them.

    Like

  • Bushie……………stop, i can’t breathe………

    Like

  • Yes, that will be done – to some extent – and we will also be taking in money from the National Currency Board (proposed) – which will be the leading financial institution coming under the schemes – money will also come from the Central Bank of Barbados, finance houses etc as well as from the peripheral financial system.

    However, savings will be liabilities (as they are in this financial accountng system) to the financial institutions!! But given that they are represented by money that will go back out of the schemes they must be properly managed against the expected number of transfers (withdrawals) by the financial institutions from out of them to savers. Good Deposits/liabilities ratios, among others, will be maintained within the schemes. But the overall idea is that monies going out will represent future streams of saved income, payments, and transfers vice-a-versa, under this current financial system in Barbados or any other.

    Another point to consider is that persons saving under these schemes will be made to contribute towards the cost of managing and maintaining their accounts in the schemes and therefore savers will be faced with savings costs to their saved remunerations and faced with the prospects of real declining savings from within (this already happens to many savers in the financial system in Barbados), or faced with the prospects of real declining savings/much non-saving from the point of view of the level at which the real actual cost of use of money has reached in the country.

    Well Well, you must recognize that a political economy and services industry sectors in which the amount of gross incomes, payment and transfers remunerated to individuals and entities is nearly always the function of the extent of use of money in the monetary system and the cost of use of money, and not the other around – the size of the expenditure (1.8 billion ) will not determine the amount of money in your scenario, from such an arbitrary perspective – you have to say what is the imagined number related to the variable: currency with the public – we are not totally clear what your assumptions are in this regard – suffice it to say that the 1.8 billion figure ought to have been your conclusion, not your premise and the figure for the currency with the public your premise, and suffice it to say that income, payments and transfers (nominal) would total near the same amount as your expenditure figure.

    However, we therefore cannot really apply this aspect of the model, that of making sure that individuals and other entities are rewarded based on previous contributions to national incomes, payments and transfers – from out of the schemes. What would be your figure for the previous year’s remunerations?? 1.5 billion? 1.6 billion?? For your information though whereas the model rewards individuals for gross income, payments, transfers – net the costs for helping run the schemes, for businesses including government businesses, it is their net income positions – minus their contributions to running the scheme. In your scenario what imaginary number would you assign to businesses in your scenario if you had to??

    Is the 900 k, real money in your scenario or an assumption of an inflated number deposit? Why we ask this question is from the point of view that deposits and so-called loans within the real financial system in Barbados are totally inflated with much of the same monies being deposited or so-called loaned countless times.

    Finally, Well Well, in your scenario there is a false assumption that we are not going to abolish so-called money debt, which, however, we will do under the schemes (We are not involving remuneration debt though – it is impossible to do so).

    PDC

    Like

  • @Inkwell
    Gotta change my underwears.
    Jesus man Lafff!!! I cudda ded.

    Like

  • “money will also come from the Central Bank of Barbados, finance houses etc as well as from the peripheral financial system”.

    PDC……………you do realize that the Central Bank of Barbados is guided by banking rules and regulations coming out of Europe and North America??, how do you plan to follow their guidelines and still create a new monetary system without getting rid of the Central Bank?? appears you still want to keep the bank, but you cannot do so unless you follow foreign banking rules and regulations.

    Like

  • At Inkwell and Bush Tea,

    As expected. Thank you.

    Artaxerxes,

    The monies that would be deposited by individuals, businesses and other relevant entities into the schemes.

    We agree with the mixed political economy description for Barbados. Under the schemes, there will be monies given to the government to be used in the context of the government/private/individual sectors’ combining in the same cases to constantly provide for opportunities for the uses by others of the relevant administrative, social, national emergency and productive services. The will be no compromising on the efficient and effective management of the delivery of these kinds of services by the same government/private sector/individual sector combinations as these services must be looked upon by the PDC as fundamental causes for the existence of a very lean sized socially responsible state/government in this country. Any intervention in the market will be done in line with what was delineated above, and within the capacity of the government to act reasonably, and within its own means – on the behalf of others and itself. In the private sector a coalitional government involving the PDC will use the appropriate fiscal financial monetary administrative and other regimes and strictures to make sure the cost of use of money by the relevant people, businesses and other entities is substantially reduced in the long term in every sphere possible in this country, via the removal of interest rates, so-called repayable loans, the abolition of motor vehicle insurance, exchange rates parities with the Barbados Dollar, etc, and thenceforward the putting in place of many very progressive regimes and policies to reduce the cost of living and doing business in the country while at the same time making sure that Barbados achieves average annual real growth rates of 8 – 10 per cent.

    David,

    All financial institutions will comply with our government laws and policies. The fact is that the financial sector is the most unproductive sector in Barbados yet is one of the most destructive diabolical sectors in the country. The financial sector will be totally reined in under a government in which the PDC is involved. All financial institutions will have to serve the fundamental interests of the people, other non-financial businesses and other entities in this country.

    The fact being that money cannot (be used to) cost money and cannot (be used to) make money and that the use of money is nil costs, show the wicked lengths to which the monetary authorities, commercial banks, credit unions, finance houses, will go to make sure that there is a great amount of legerdermain unfair manipulation and deceit that is brazenly heaped on the hapless victims of their wickedness. One very possible outcome of these vulgar inglorious effects is that the financial system – and government too – if not derailed from off their paths – will take Barbados down the hell seeking road towards Greece, Cyprus, Portugal, etc in the long term.

    All financial institutions will have to invest in productive and non-productive activities and use money to get future income or payment – just like how the non-financial private sector does it, or use their little real available financial accounting consultation expertise and acumen to the benefit of many others who would give them an amount of money to use with others in securing further remuneration down the road. Under the schemes, no financial institution will charge any person, business, or any other in Barbados for mere use at any time of the Barbadian people’s money, nor will any such person, business or any other entity get money owing to their providing at any time the Barbadian people’s money to any financial institution in the country, unless, of course, it is the return of the equivalent amount of saved income, payment, transfer put in the institution earlier, or any part thereof.

    PDC

    Like

  • St George's Dragon

    I have read this thread with interest and it has changed my view of how the relationship between Government and the people in Barbados is intended to work. Previously, I had thought that (looking specifically at VAT) businesses which fall within the regulations had to pay VAT on their sales and if they over paid, they got the money back.
    I now realise that it is not that simple and you will not get a refund in the following circumstances:
    – unless you know the right people
    – if you made a contribution to the losing party at the last election
    – you are a small hotelier
    – at all because Government has been withholding VAT refunds for a long time
    – because you are part of the tourist industry which has had Government support in the past
    – if you are white business owner
    – unless your business is run as a worker cooperative
    – unless you get the ex-colonial powers to pay reparation money for slavery
    – until Al Barrack has been paid
    – if you are Adrian Loveridge
    Scary. Rules are rules and refunds should be paid to all who are entitled to them/

    Like

  • Pacamama
    Common sense and comprehension seem to escape your grips every time. Yes, I would vote for a white candidate if he or she represented where I believe Barbados should go. They are Bajans too; you joker you.

    Like

  • Pacamama
    I was reading the people you have now catch up with in my teens. All human systems are built on greed and control; do not be fooled by the window dressing, my friend.

    Like

  • I am curious to know who are these “small business ‘ adrien speaking of.

    Like

  • Artaxerxes,

    Let us say that Barbadians will be ensuring that the process of circulating their own money comes about at the lowest costs to their incomes, payments and transfers (nominal).

    At what ever levels you are thinking about, Barbadians and non-Barbadians alike contribute to national/domestic output, here or elsewhere. They contribute to the production, distribution and use of goods and services via ONLY the use of their own labour or entrepreneurial services and the use of tools, technologies, machineries, vehicles, etc.

    Money plays NO role whatsoever in such non-money production, distribution and use affairs!! The ONLY role that money is made to play by its users is a USE role whenever it involves the said users giving money to get money – then or later – whether or not it is the same monies – in whatever contextual expressions. MONEY PLAYS NO ROLE WHEN IT IS IDLE!!

    So, whether money is given to and received by one another voluntarily, or handed over to and received by the government from the relevant individuals, businesses or other entities through forcible means, at the same or different times, non-money commodities exist on one level, services at another level, and money at another level. They do not ever mix, even though they can be and are combined by human beings many times. They are like the material, the spiritual and the intellectual – which do not mix but combine countless times via human intervention.

    In their natural states, none of the three causes any other, or shapes the other. But in their unnatural states (meaning with human intervention) none of the three causes any other, or shapes the other, without the use of at least one other!! But the stark possibility still exist that one cannot change at least one other, in an unnatural state of affairs.

    So a similar thing applies to non-money commodities, services or money in their natural states: none causes the other or shapes the other. But in their unnatural states(meaning with human intervention) none of the three causes any other, or shapes the other, without the use of at least one other. The distinct possibility still exist that one cannot change one other, in an unnatural state of affairs. So, the part statement that “these people will not contribute to the provision of goods and services THROUGH taxation”, is a correct and valid one in the sense that “these people will NOT contribute to the provision of goods and services (which exist at one level) THROUGH taxation (which exist at another level) and a correct and valid one from the point of view that it is possible to see every circumstance where people will not contribute to the provision of goods and services THROUGH taxation.

    PDC

    Like

  • And if you don’t understand now, Artaxerxes, you are more dense than lead.

    Like

  • Carson C. Cadogan

    St George’s Dragon | April 29, 2013 at 10:14 PM

    You carrying it a bit too far.

    Like

  • Carson C. Cadogan

    Worth a listen

    Like

  • @ac
    Your ignorance knows no bounds. A small business is one that employs less than a prescribed number of people, or whose turnover is less than a prescribed amount. Both these numbers depend on the country in which they operate. So in the U.S., a small business is one that turns over less than US$10 millions, whereas in Barbados it might be one that turns over less than BD$1 million, or employs less than 20 persons. So the majority of people employed in Barbados in the private sector are employed in small businesses, or micro-businesses, by far the majority being black-owned and operated. So look around you ac, there are small businesses everywhere.

    Like

  • Admittedly, The Crane is not exactly a small biz; but just want to say:

    Kudos to The Crane

    The April 27 issue of the National Post newspaper in Toronto included a 32 page glossy advertising magazine supplement Grand Luxury Travel, focused on the upper end traveler. Go to: http://compassmediagroup.ca/images/Grand_April_22_4_13_sm-1.pdf

    Page 9 is a full page ad for St. Lucia Tourism.

    Page 17 is a full age ad for The Crane. There being no Flying Fish logo included suggests no BTA (taxpayer) participation, the ad being paid by The Crane.

    It is undoubtedly a pretty pricey ad, which smaller hotels could not afford; but surely BHTA could do something along these lines on behalf of its members

    Like

  • Carson C. Cadogan

    The Crane Hotel and Accra Beach hotel certainly are run by Business people.

    I don’t know what to call the others.

    Like

  • Adrian Loveridge

    Carson, why would good ‘business people’ need to beg nearly $1 million in TIRF taxpayer funds to help subsidise their hotel?

    Like

  • Carson…………..i got one here for you to see.

    Like

  • How come no one is commenting on this today?

    http://www.barbadostoday.bb/2013/04/29/leave-the-money-alone/

    Like

  • Bushie……….these ILO guys are not as frivolous as you were trying to lead me to believe………..these guys are serious as heart attacks, can you tell me that the administration is willing to test them???

    Like

  • @ Inkwell

    I certainly don’t understand, moreso at this level than the other level.

    Like

  • Carson C. Cadogan

    Well well

    I saw that one as WELL.

    Like

  • Carson C. Cadogan

    Adrian when you were closing down for half the year and so on and laying off staff, Accra Beach Hotel staff were working full weeks and in some cases overtime.

    Like

  • Carson………………Greece is about to lay off 15, 000 civil servants, very great cause for concern………..

    Like

  • @peltdown

    Everybody think there are so smart.. Well yes sometimes ignorance is necessary in order to get the truth or understandin how a person is thinking.
    The fact is after all the talk about the “small business” who reallyt is Adrien speaking about .Does it include the small corner shop, The beauty shops . The entrepenuer having a small store in Swan street. Lets be clear these people struggle and very little is written or said about govt helping these people when they fall or hard times and bTW most of them are black. where are the cries for such people.Therfore my query was one of getting more information from Adrien as to whom he was speaking about. U pletdown ought to mind your business u think u so smart.;
    i don’t need no lecture from u . I have a business thank god i do not need any govt help but there are times when people say things that they should expand on. u dimb a.sss

    Like

  • small business people can include anyone who own a small business but let’s put everything it its right perspective and call a spade a spade. no pusstfooting and pretending . if one delivers a statement come clean say what you mean. there are too many selfserving individuals roaming this planet that only sees a need for something when it affects them personally and need support for their business or cause.

    Like

  • Carson C. Cadogan

    From Facebook

    FORMER MP ARRESTED?

    Unconfirmed reports crossing my desk suggest that former MP Mr Rommell Marshall was allegedly arrested last week at the Bridgetown port on drugs charges. Apparently it is concerning the import of BBQ grills and coals with drugs hidden in the coals.

    Attempts to contact the port authority and Mr Marshall has proven futile, but workers at the port claim to have witnessed the event!!

    WUHLOSS! PEPPASAUCE!
    Raquel Gilkes

    Could this be true?

    Like

  • Carson C. Cadogan

    Well Well | April 30, 2013 at 9:32 PM

    Very little escapes me.

    Like

  • St George's Dragon

    I just read Haynesley Benn’s comments in the Advocate about the value of VAT owed by businesses.
    What worries me is that the figures Government quotes of $300 million outstanding for VAT and $177 million for land tax may not actually be realisable.
    The figures reported just appear to be a historic total of the amounts which have not been paid in the past. What evidence does Government have that the amounts due are actually recoverable?
    A case in point is Bajan Cleaning Enterprises. It looks as though they have gone (or are about to go) bust owing close to $3.5 million in VAT. You can bet that this included in the $300 million quoted figure. If it was, then clearly it is unlikely to be paid now and questions need to be asked about whether it should have continued to be carried as a debt when there were serious questions about whether it would ever be paid.
    Businesses look at outstanding debts every year to see if they are recoverable. If they are not, they write them off.
    I have seen nothing to show that Government has a similar process in place. That means that we are left assuming that huge sums of money are due to Government and will be paid when that may well not be the case.
    This is important when Barbados is struggling with public debt and borrowings.

    Like

  • @ PDC

    What effect would your proposed monetary policy have on the national debt and fiscal deficit, especially in this prevailing protracted economic recession, taking into consideration that Barbados is a mixed economy, which is not at full employment? How would these policies help stabilise the economy and smooth business cycle fluctuations? How are these policies related to the current account and international capital flows? What about the impact on foreign direct investments?

    As you are aware, government provides a broad range of essential goods and services, which require the collection of taxes. Additionally, although changes in taxation is a classic counter-cyclical fiscal policy, abolishing taxes will increase the fiscal deficit. Overtime, an increase in the budget deficit resulting from the abolition of, or cut in taxes, will increase the public debt. This increase will raise important issues concerning the long-run effects of the removal of taxes on interest rates, capital investment and the future economic welfare.

    Lower taxes, [ceteris paribus], will increase the disposable income of households. As a consequence, how much is spent or saved, and the response of economic
    activity, will no doubt depend on the the decision households make and the prevailing macroeconomic environment.

    Under your proposals, will foreign capital inflows increase to offset any decrease in national savings as a result of these monetary changes? If they do, then the current account deficit, which is equal to the quantity of foreign capital inflows, will increase enough to offset the increase in the budget deficit less the induced decrease in private savings. As a result, the future levels of capital stock and real output will not decrease, but future domestic consumption will, because an increased share of the return to capital will accrue to foreign investors.

    Like

  • nobody worries about who owes the govt. the mantra is about what the govt owes “them”.

    Like

  • What is this, is the government paying people to come to Barbados so they tourism figures can be pumped up??

    http://www.perthnow.com.au/travel/travel-news/please-visit-barbados-island-well-pay-you/story-fnho5w8j-1226632249736

    Like

  • Carson……………we all know Rommel is a few cards short of a full deck, but when him an BLP fell out, he fell right into bed with DLP without pause……..so you do need to find out who the other players are in the grand scheme of things…..and why was the public not informed that a former parliamentarian and politician was arrested??

    Like

  • So are we to believe the government is cutting out the middle man (hotels) and going straight to the source (the tourist) and pump millions of taxpayers dollars into the pockets of tourists, so they will visit the island? I am definitely against giving hotels and hoteliers anymore taxpayers dollars, but how can you justify giving millions to the tourists……….never heard of this before, which other country in the world pays tourists to visit them, especially broke tourists?

    Like

  • @St.Georges Dragon

    To follow your last comment, if the statutory bodies were compliant with international standards would the ageing of the debt not be clarified and therefore less open to manipulation by politicians?

    @Well Well

    Governments including Barbados have given air credits ie. directly to the airlines meaning most of it never got spent on Barbados. This way the money is sure to be spent in Barbados. The industry unfortunately is heavily discounted.

    Like

  • Ah ha………..i was wondering about the method, if I remember correctly, it is coupons that are only redeemable in Bim??

    Like

  • Artaxerxes

    The PDC has evolved twelve (12) fundamental principles concerning MONEY and its uses in Barbados.

    Here is the number 3 principle – M, or its uses, CANNOT give rise to M debt – nothing can anyhow (any amount of M when transferred by any financial institution to another institution – financial or otherwise – or to a person, or vice-a-versa, when eventually used by them in the goods and services market will NOT be traced by them for any reasonable length of time, or the recipients of the transferred use of money of any knowledge of tracing where such money would have come from (some time before the person that was using the money in their presence ) – so there is NO such thing as M debt – just M and its being used by persons). M – in other relevant cases though – can only represent nominal income, payment, transfer debts of individuals, businesses, etc (where at any times individuals, businesses, etc. lent some portions, or all, of their incomes, payments, transfers, to others, they are therefore indebted to, because it is their properties that are lent and that are personal corporate ones that can be referenced, that are recordable/traceable – the same thing applies to those financial institutions that are indebted to savers/policyholders who have placed saved income, payments, and transfers in those institutions).

    The reason for reproducing this principle is to let you know, Artaxerxes, that the National Institutional Non-Repayable Productive Loans Scheme and the National Institutional Non-Repayable Non-Productive Loans Scheme will be tasked with the application, where necessary, of that principle to various financial circumstances in the country. The primary reason for the existence of these schemes will not only be to support – politically, technically and otherwise, all national sub-national efforts related to the securing of a POST-TAXATION society for Barbados (including the liberation of the entire Barbadian people from the evil scourge of TAXATION), but also to eliminate – in whatever ways – all so-called individual, corporate, sectoral and other debts that would have otherwise arisen out of financial institutions in Barbados taking the people’s money and so-called lending it to them.

    Indeed, one of the many political financial effects of this paradigmatic transformation will be the ability of all Barbadians, all Barbadian enterpprises, including the government of Barbados, in Barbados, to use money out of all money collecting financial institutions in this country, and not ever have short or long term debt imposed upon them by these institutions and themselves, and not fear the use by them of any amounts of money in any proposed business ventures of theirs, and too not fear some of the political legal consequences of the use of our OWN money in any commercial business social settings. To be continued……. Artaxerxes.

    PDC

    Like

  • PDC……………i noticed you danced around and side-stepped the below questions that remain on record……………………can you now answer me, if you want people to take you seriously, you have to deal with all the issues and concerns, every last one of them…………

    Well Well | April 29, 2013 at 7:51 PM |

    “money will also come from the Central Bank of Barbados, finance houses etc as well as from the peripheral financial system”.

    PDC……………you do realize that the Central Bank of Barbados is guided by banking rules and regulations coming out of Europe and North America??, how do you plan to follow their guidelines and still create a new monetary system without getting rid of the Central Bank?? appears you still want to keep the bank, but you cannot do so unless you follow foreign banking rules and regulations.

    Like

  • @ St. Georges Dragon
    “What worries me is that the figures Government quotes of $300 million outstanding for VAT”

    All politicians have the gift of manipulating figures. What Benn should have done is to give us a breakdown of the how much of the VAT debt is owed by the public and private sectors. For procurement purposes, government departments stipulate that persons doing business with them, must produce VAT, NIS and PAYE clearance certificates. There are statutory corporations that provide services such as SSA, NCC, NCF, NPC, National Sports Council, Transport Board. Then there are the ministries/departments that also charge VAT, such as the Post Office, Government Printery, Grantley Adams International Airport, Queen Elizabeth Hospital. What is the VAT debt status?

    It is a known fact that cash strapped statutory corporations, as do the private sector, will submit NIS schedules and not the associated remittance. Does the same apply to VAT?

    Like

  • IT is called effeciency the way the govt has gone about distributing the 11million instead of putting it in the hands of hoteliers who have abused the system and mismanged the billions given to them over the years in an all out effort by previuous adminstrations to secure jobs

    Like

  • AC………………i now understand the why for their actions, but would still like to confirm that these coupons are only redeemable in Barbados…

    Like

  • Art…………..and more importantly, the names/business names and addresses of these tax dodgers who owe the government/taxpayers this sum of over 1/4 billion dollars should be published for the public to see who has been scamming them………why is the government still giving us half the story??

    Like

  • Carson C. Cadogan

    The Government is going about the Tourism issues the correct way.

    The Taxpaying public has subsidized the Tourist for far too long. They need to get off their duffs and help them selves. Fortunately they are a few Hotels in Barbados on the right track.

    The others want money to buy BMW’s, Mercedes, Yachts in the Careenage, etc.

    Like

  • Carson C. Cadogan

    should be “Tourist Industry”.

    Like

  • @Well Well

    The coupons can only be used at participating merchants in Barbados. The BTA was forced to move to an initiative like this one because the market had copied they other discount programs according to Avril Byer.

    Like

  • The only solution would be for investgative information by media oulets to pursue the issue and to opublish the names. However i am not sure if it is confidential information protected by a “privacy ACT” also another problem that might be problematic for govt getting invoved in the declartion of these entities might be a blacklash from potential investors who would see this information as damaging to their business and reputations and a real cause for concern

    Like

  • St George's Dragon

    So let’s list the VAT offenders:
    – Courts (reputedly) – $25 million
    – Bajan Cleaning Services (now not recoverable) – $3.5 million
    ….any others?

    Like

  • What could be more damaging to the taxpayers and government than businesses owing over 1/4 billion dollars in taxes?? furthermore, why is government allowing a privacy act to stay in place that protects businesses when they dodge taxes, the government should not be complaining when they are owed such huge sums, they are actually enabling the criminal act of tax dodging by keeping the privacy act in place to protect tax dodging companies who rely on taxpayers for their very survival………..this does not bode well for collecting taxes. Government is acting like the country is not in crisis, i now believe given what we are discussing that they will no way collect any of the 1/4 billion dollars owed…………..both parties had many years to change those privacy act laws.

    Like

  • The authorities need to enforce the Laws of BARBADOS but the authorities are lenient and feeling for people because if the law is enforced it will touch everybody and some people feel that they are untouchable and the laws do not apply to them, their sons , daughters. cousins, and other relatives and even their friends and aquaintances .

    If an Officer reports a person on the road that person then calls his friend who knows a gazzetted Officer who cannot tell him NO and who then uses his influence on the Station Sargeant/Constable to have the report quashed .

    If this shite continue how will we ever get things right. The law should be foe everybody.

    Like

  • AC……………….foreign investors have Freedom of Information Acts in their own countries…………they expect those Acts in any countries they are planning to invest in, if the Act does not exist in Barbados…………their investment will turn into a scam that the investor will make sure he is the prime beneficiary………………if the government ever gets the balls to get rid of those privacy acts and legislate Freedom of Information Acts, it will in no way deter investors from bringing their money to the Island……………ask Trinidad.

    Like

  • St George's Dragon

    Copied from (as they quaintly say) another section of the press, and with the health warnings that this is from 2011 and that you are innocent until proved guilty:
    Below is a list of some of the cases lodged in the Supreme Court involving the VAT Department.
    – Rayside Construction [case No .2175/05] $5 198 828. 35 for Inland Revenue;
    -Clarke’s Auto Express [case No. 1729/2000] $1 250 932.51 for the VAT Department;
    -Spektakula Promotions [case No. 1630/03] $446 354.99 for VAT;
    -Pierce Furniture & Furnishings Ltd [case no.1255/03] $981 866.58 in VAT;
    -Roger Hill Trading as Sazzy Boutique [case No. 476/03] $878 615.42 in VAT;
    -Wild Pair Shoes [case No. 2719/02] $549 083.34 in VAT; and
    -Kentucky Fried Chicken [case no.115/02] $461 837.63 in VAT.
    -Divi Southwinds faces two judgements for [case No. 1217/01] $374 239. 43 and [case No. 1218/01] $673 961.09;
    -Grant Hotels Inc. has four judgements for $1 250 766.55 [case No. 2100/99], $826 744.87 [case No. 1157/03] and $27 229.36 [case No. 2099/99] for Inland Revenue and $880 420.39 [case No. 1074/03] for VAT

    Like

  • The days of political bullshit is over. The mess is beginning to hit the fan. Only the political yardfowls believe in the old ways.

    Like

  • BU notes that Roger Hill is on the list who we all know is one of the partners in FAS Entertainment with Al Gilkes, the promoter of Reggae on the Hill. Of note is that the government through the Barbados Tourism Authority is a major sponsor.

    One incestuous pit!

    Like

  • AC……………any actions lodged in the courts are public knowledge, the government could have exposed these names and court docket numbers many years ago……………..i hope they realize it’s the taxpayers they will now have to face as this unfolds and all the years of fancy talk, that has now turned into putrid bull is now beginning to splatter far and wide, and they will not be able to escape being drenched in this farce of their own making.

    Like

  • St George's Dragon

    …..and from “another section of the press” from over two years ago:
    “Thursday, a senior Government official told the ***** that money owed to the state could likely be more than B$200 million since there were many outstanding sums that had not reached the stage of certificates of judgement being lodged.
    He explained that in several instances the judgements had been re-registered at the five-year stipulated period to prevent them being voided, in keeping with Section 3 Subsection (1) of the Registration of Judgements Act, Chapter 210.
    The official suggested that with the 2.5 per cent increase in VAT there was the real danger that while Government might be collecting more revenue, there was the possible flip side that outstanding fees due to the state could also likely get cumulatively greater.
    He said it was crucial that Government enforced the law and collections be dealt with as a matter of national priority.
    “A charging order can be placed on these people’s properties and they can be sold but this is not being done. There are a number of things to consider, I guess, such as people being employed and the need for enterprises to keep functioning,” he said.
    When contacted Minister of Finance Chris Sinckler, under whose portfolio the VAT and Inland Revenue departments fall, told the ****** the situation was very serious. He said that defaulters should make every effort to meet with both the VAT and Inland Revenue departments and make arrangements to have their payment issues settled.
    Sinckler said the massive sums owed Government could go a significant distance in servicing some of the needs of the country.”
    So what has been done in the last two tears to address the situation?

    Like

  • St George's Dragon

    Freudian slip. That should be “years” in the last sentence.

    Like

  • Carson……………….don’t forget some of the small hotel owners also want the black taxpayers to pay them through government for something that white england did to their white ancestors over 400 years ago, also have to watch out for those opportunistic whites.

    Like

  • Tears is right…………..St. Georges……………they will all be crying real tears pretty soon, for sitting and doing nothing about this situation, even seizing properties would have been better than what is now on the horizon, at least they would have had assets and keep the businesses open with government as the new owners, instead they did nothing, expecting some business owner to walk into VAT office with a 25 million dollar cheque or even a $100K (grand) cheque………………amazing.

    Like

  • This word expecting keeps being associated with Sinckler…………..i wonder what he is expecting next?

    Like

  • We need to hear more about why COURT BARBADOS has not paid 25 million VAT due.

    Like

  • Adrian Loveridge

    David,
    If the quoted figures are correct, a former BHTA President and a current board member of the Barbados Tourism Authority is among those running businesses with judgements against them! What chance do ‘we’ stand?

    Like

  • Carson C. Cadogan

    Well Well | May 1, 2013 at 9:47 AM

    you gine get cuss!!!

    Like

  • Adrian Loveridge

    David,
    And lest we forget, did Divi Southwinds also receive $138,909.38 in TIRF (Tourism Industry Relief Funds) taxpayers monies on 27.05.2009?

    Like

  • @Adrian

    Correction, DIVI does not belong to Alvin Jemmott, he is the general manager.

    Like

  • Carson……………let them bring it on……….i have more powerful ammunition.

    Like

  • The seriiousness iof the uncollected monies due to govt not only affect the economy but is a heavy price and a burden that the average working stiff have to pay in heavy taxation in helping to cover these losses and keep country afloat .Something should be done about this gross injustice heaped upon the working stiff by tax dodgers and govt must shoulder this responsibilty by taking action.

    Like

  • What it shows is very poor revenue collection practices by government. It shows many of our private sector companies are inefficiently and unethically managed. It shows Barbadians are blissfully unaware of what is happening because this is one of the talking points which should have resonated last general election.

    Like

  • Aside from the current situation that the government debt, the fiscal deficit of the government, the depression in Barbados and the employment situation and other relevant situations are worsening and that they altogether have been caused by many of the wicked inept policies and programs of governments, private sector and other people in this country over the years; and which are policies and programs that we and many others in Barbados and beyond will abolish and re-orient under a coalition government involving the PDC, we must nevertheless say that it must be considered by many individuals that these distressing situations are primarily the effects of their own causes.

    So, it would be extremely difficult next to impossible to properly say what the effects are and what the extent of these effects would be of the implementation of these proposed policies on the situations/variables you have mentioned, if these said dysfunctional variables and others and their contaminated mangled environments were to remain in existence in Barbados. It would be like studying the effects of kerosene oil alone when the kerosene oil has been added to water that has already been in a small fungus bearing moss rust catching steel can that itself has long had debris and diesel and gasoline mixed up in it.

    So, there are entirely different variables, propositions hypotheses, assumptions, deductions and predictions and many entirely different relationships between and among them, that we have been dealing with (as should have been gathered by yourself). So it is clear that things like government debts or government deficits, recessions, employment, will naturally be abolished, prevented or re-oriented by means of the implementation of laws, regulations, directions, policies of a coalition government of Barbados involving the PDC.

    So, we will not be dealing with/theorizing for any debts of government, or for any fiscal deficits of any government, any recessions, employment, any economy, in the context of the laws, regulations, the policies, directions related to the establishment of these schemes, given the application then by our coalition government and many others of those twelve (12) principles and many other financial and other principles to any of the financial circumstances of the country.

    To provide a definite firm example: we are dealing with/theorizing for partnerships, instead of companies, corporations;we are dealing with partners rather than workers, supervisors, managers, owners; we are dealing with remunerations of partners, not wages and salaries of workers, supervisors, managers, owners, etc; and we are hypothesizing for partnerships, on a majority basis, agreeing to take on or dispose of partners, and not a few managing directors or other managers doing so.

    Although we would agree that there will still then be practised by many people many ideologies, philosophies and psychologies that are in existence today and that have long been in existence – ideas related to the fact of money itself; the fact of the need for financial institutions and governmental institutions in Barbados; related to the fact that we are human beings, etc and that we will continue to practice certain social political cultural behaviours, attitudes and values, in many social political legal material financial settings, we wish to say still that many of the effects of our policies and programs must be properly extensively studied/hypothesized based on their own likely causes and their resultant effects, for their assumed strengths and weaknesses, or for their likely differences between theory and facts.

    Hence, the PDC is concerned about the ideas espoused by some that the debts or fiscal deficits of the government or of corporations in Barbados only come about through – what we know are – many people’s practising the false ideology, the false philosophy and false psychology that debts emerge out of the use of money, and not as a result of – what we in the PDC know too – the practising and the processing of agreements between minds, and the practising and processing of laws that are unequally disposed between the many minds involved in the process of sensing such ideas, such thoughts and such mentalities into practical human behaviour consistent with the consequent use of money in particular ways in particular settings.

    So, the PDC has to arrive at situations where many more minds in Barbados will accept and agree to the fact that M – in any spheres of human life in Barbados – can never lead to M debt – and of course by our going to the circumstances of the sources of the false perceptions of money debt and dominating them with these moral ideological philosophical psychological principles that are focussed on M and its better uses in the country. To be continued………..Artaxerxes

    PDC

    Like

  • Well Well,

    We will answer you shortly.

    PDC

    Like

  • David…………………for some reason the opposition did not think it necessary to touch the tax dodging topic during elections, that would have started under their management as well back in the 90s and allowed to continue into 2013.

    Like

  • Now here is an area where Caswelll and BU would be of great benefit in educating the misinformed pubklic by publicly realeasing the names of these giant corporation if gvt does not have the guts to deal with this problem afterall a country in debt and millions of dollars floating around uncollected . Something not right

    Like

  • David, “Only the political yardfowls believe in the old ways.”

    Internet,blogs,facebook, cel phone cameras……It will become increasingly difficult to hide.

    Expect some Bajan wicked leaks as things worsen.

    Like

  • On the basis of our model theorizations, many persons, businesses and other entities will – using these schemes and other apposite arrangements – realize for one another, and by extension the entire collective of people too, greater commercial activity in the country, in terms of actual medium/long term increases of quantities of imports, exports; in terms of actual medium/long term increases in the amounts/volumes of domestic and foreign capital, investment, technology, fixed and capital assets; in terms of actual medium/long term increases in the building and constructing of fixed assets (factories, plants, offices, homes, roads, bridges, etc); in terms of actual medium/long term increases in the manufacturing and distribution of consumer, capital and intermediate goods; and in
    terms of actual medium long/ term increases in agricultural and food production, and in other regards.

    Such increases in output will be based on/caused by the expansion of human physical mechanical electrical technological efforts.

    Such increases will NOT be however caused by any thing associated with the money base or any increases by the masses and middle classes of Barbados of use of money, but will be reflective/supportive of the question of how human beings have been able to contradict or compete with one another over many political material financial and other affairs in the quest to survive and develop as time goes by.

    Artaxerxes, we still see that you are introjecting notions of fiscal/budget deficits, interest rates, lower taxes, etc into the model theory, when already such is inapplicable.

    Your question: whether foreign capital flows would increase to offset any decrease in the national savings as a result of such monetary changes? is an interesting one. But let us ask you: how do they get here?? Do you think even a quarter of all of those capital inflows really come here?? There is really no basis for contrasting the two, especially since the local money from which the majority of domestic savings are derived are almost 100 per cent in Barbados, and since there is a low amount of foreign capital inflows (numbers) into Barbados, with the vast majority remaining outside of Barbados. For Balance of Payments accounting purposes, these monies/numbers will be registered as income flows

    With the estimated rate of real actual cost of use of money (local) going downwards tremendously over time in Barbados, it must mean that when it is taken away from the size of monetary base, it will give the estimated rate of actual benefit of use of money. This means too that if the estimated rate of real actual cost of use of money is lowered from 84 per cent at this juncture, to 50 per cent at the next 5 years, that the estimated 16 per cent that is the estimated real actual benefit of use of money in the country today, will increase to 50 per cent at the next 5 years, altogether on annualized bases.

    This 50 per cent rate of benefit would signify the extent to which the financial institutions owe the savers saved remuneration and the extent to which persons are using other means of saving. As the rate of real actual cost of use of money goes down and down it will begin to be explained by the cost of use of money theory that financial institutions are not charging for the use of money and that more and more people will be using other means of saving, while at the same time there will be greater than now increases in the use of money in many sectors by individuals, businesses and other entities.

    So there we go, Artaxerxes.

    PDC

    Like

  • St George's Dragon

    @ PDC
    Please explain, for someone who has tried for a long time to understand your policies, just one simple expression that you use. What does “the real actual cost of use of money” mean. And I may have this wrong but is it the case that you do not believe that interest should be charged when money is lent?
    What is the difference between interest and “real actual cost of use of money”, or is that me misunderstanding something?

    Like

  • St. George’s Dragon,

    This theory of the cost of use of money starts from some very axiomatic factual assertions: that goods and services do not contain money; that goods and services do not actually bring in money; that prices only exist in the “minds” of people; that money does however exist outside of the “minds” of people; that money cannot cost or make money; and that use of money is zero money cost.

    So, given these monumental facts, it has been left to be concluded by the PDC that, in order to use money, and in their attempts to defy such logics, the monetary authorities, the commercial banks, credit unions, finance houses, the stock exchange, insurance companies, and share holding companies, etc plus savers of monies in commercial banks, policy holders in insurance companies, investors in the stock exchange, in share holding companies and government paper, etc are, on one set of hands, hierarchically charging one another’s incomes, payments or transfers for the others’ uses of money, and are , on the other set of hands, being hierarchically the beneficiaries of allowing others to have the use of money, respectively, and too in the vast majority of all of those transactions many persons and other entities are either, in many top down fashions, passing on – to some extent – such costs of use to others’ remunerations, or many persons and other entities too are, in many of the same top down fashions too, recovering – to some extent – some of those costs of use of money from such remunerations.

    What has also been clear in all commercial business transactions involving the use of money, in Barbados, is that the cost of use of money is only effectuated when the use of money is being transferred by persons, businesses and other entities to other such entities or when the use of such is being handed over by the relevant individuals or groups of individuals to the other relevant persons, businesses and other parties to these transactions. While there is also the transferral of use of goods by many persons, businesses, and other entities to other such entities simultaneously as the use of money is being transferred from sets of entities to other sets, the truth is that the cost of use of money is based on monies going from entities (costings) to entities and not to entities from other entities (benefittings) !!! It is based on monies spent out of extant incomes, payments and transfers. It therefore does not involve the government, to a greater extent, and the financial sector, to a lesser extent – since they are very unproductive and are essentially involved in transferring money from different entities to other ones. They hardly receive any or all of the following: incomes, payments, and transfers.

    Whereas, “the real actual cost of use of money”, is first and foremost an estimate of the real actual cost of use of money in only macro-industrial commercial sectoral settings, is expressed in percentage terms per year/ per month and is rated in terms of its performance over contrasting periods – one year/month with another year/month, in the sense in which it is herein used, the cost of use of money theory broadly describes, explains and predicts the extent which all persons, businesses, and other entities in Barbados are and are going to be using our own money (the Barbados) in all money transactions on a yearly basis in the country, and the amount it is and it is going to be costing us to use our money when contrasted with other periods.

    So, for instance, an entire set of persons have gone to their respective banks or credit unions or finance houses in a certain entire year and have got debit transfers of monies (so-called loans) from those institutions to them in the region of BDS $ 1 million altogether in money terms, no cheques etc.

    Now let us say there are interest charges to be made and added to the principals throughout the duration of the persons transferring of credit ( monies) (so-called loan repayments ) to the institutions and that these have been calculated before the start of the process of the credit transferrals of monies, and that these amounts divided into given years/ months are numerically what are to be expected by the parties to be handed in to the respective financial institutions in the final analysis. Hence, it must mean that these amounts therefore amount to be the theoretical costs of use of money for the years/months ahead.

    But, the actual costs of use of money will be the actual amounts that are handed in by the credit transferers ( people making them ) to the credit transferees (financial institutions) on a yearly/monthly bases, throughout the times of the contracts. The total amounts handed in might be more or less than what was theorized earlier for whatever reasons. If more, it might be because of the late fees or wacky interest formulas that some of the transferers faced. If less, might be because of hard times hitting some of the transferers, they going deep In arrears, and they therefore having to see the contracts terminated will be before their expected times of ending.

    Generally, the real actual cost of use of money takes into consideration the estimated size of the money base, especially because it is a relatively fixed amount of money that all users of money are using and are being charged for, muchly because it is all or virtually all of the same money that is being used by the same users, and truly because with growth or decline in the size of it there are implications for the cost of use of money. Imagine that in the scenario presented above that the money base was only BDS $ 10 000 that much of it was being recycled among the same users, and that the estimated rate of the real cost of use of money was 20 per cent!!! To be continued……. St. George’s Dragon.

    PDC

    Like

  • St. George’s Dragon

    You are correct.

    Interest Rates are wrong and evil and suggest that money can make money or cost money, when in truth and in fact that is impossible. Wheresoever, whenever there are interest rates regimes, they increase the cost of use of money, esp in a context where the monetary base is relatively fixed at periods of time.

    As you can see from our last post before this one, the real cost of use of money in Barbados includes but is clearly therefore not limited to interest rates costs.

    Interest Rates costs are a relatively small component of these costs when contrasted with, say, the principals of so-called loans got of which equivalent amounts are fetched and handed in by the credit transferors to the relevant financial institutions.

    PDC

    Like

  • This is how these cases are supposed to be handled………..

    http://www.trinidadexpress.com/news/Yachtie-66-on-sex-charge-denied-bail–205896241.html

    Like

  • @PDC
    a small flaw in your theory.
    People!

    Like

  • PLANTATION DEEDS FROM 1926-2013 AND SEE MASSIVE FRAUD ,LAND TAX BILLS AND NO DEEDS

    The only small business the Government have is robbing the people of big money. Vampires thy eare sucking the People dry , If or when your small business get to big for you, The GOVT will take it over , What she going to do with all daaaa dayyy SOOOOO.,then they step in and take it , For as we can see they know better than the owners who made the business grow to a large business.

    Like

  • PLANTATION DEEDS FROM 1926-2013 AND SEE MASSIVE FRAUD ,LAND TAX BILLS AND NO DEEDS
  • PLANTATION DEEDS FROM 1926-2013 AND SEE MASSIVE FRAUD ,LAND TAX BILLS AND NO DEEDS
  • One things for sure, the taxpayers will definitely have to keep an eye on the politicians regarding this oil exploration, it is not beneath local politicians to keep any successes hidden from the taxpayers to satisfy their and their friends own self-serving interests……….

    Like

  • PLANTATION DEEDS FROM 1926-2013 AND SEE MASSIVE FRAUD ,LAND TAX BILLS AND NO DEEDS

    All the oil money will be in an offshore bank accounts , out of the reach of the People.

    Like

  • Don’t worry Plantation, it will be promptly frozen by the industrialized countries once they find out………….

    Like

  • PLANTATION DEEDS FROM 1926-2013 AND SEE MASSIVE FRAUD ,LAND TAX BILLS AND NO DEEDS

    Government Needs to Protect Small Businesses@ in American that turn in to big business , Slavery. if the judges kept it small it would not raise a RED FLAG. The Video is real at all levels of America . Most court cases start with a lie., a lie told to police who then send it in to the system , then the lawyers show up.take a plea and give me your hard earn money.
    American allow fraud to work to make money on all other groups, But when WHITE American is affected by the same fraud that is when they look to stop it.
    Barbados BLP /DLP plays that same game that work so well to fool and take from the People.

    Like

  • Since gaining independence in 1966, no political authorities other than the government of Barbados and the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC), and since the government of Barbados had cut ties with the said Council in the middle of the first decade of the 21st Century and at the same time acceded to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) whereupon the CCJ has been made to take the place of the JCPC – have been exercising sovereignty over the banking credit union and financial affairs of this country.

    So other than the CCJ, there is no other international or regional group that exercises any sovereignty over any banking and financial institutions or processes in this country. Furthermore, other than in the case of those regional inter-governmental agreements that were used to establish the said CCJ – no post independence government of Barbados has therefore entered into any otherwise relevant agreements with any other international or regional political state or non-state actors that have seen the government of Barbados relinquishing any sovereignty over these affairs.

    But there are times when the Cabinet of the government of Barbados – one of the governmental bodies that exercises sovereign power in Barbados, or the legislature – another one of the sovereign wielding bodies in Barbados – decides to share or relinquish sovereignty over the making of certain decisions in Barbados, not with a particular external extra-state or non-state grouping of people, but with a certain very professional subordinate semi-independent intra-state body of people , or does decide to delegate the making of such sovereign decisions in the country to such a body of people.

    The Central Bank of Barbados is therefore one of those domestic governmental institutions in which sovereignty has been vested in by the Cabinet of the government of Barbados to make particular decisions (the delegation of power to make certain) over certain domestic financial affairs in this country, eg, to issue the Barbados currency.

    So, where the Central Bank of Barbados is concerned, it cannot be seen by the PDC to be in turn relinquishing/delegating sovereignty over those decisions to any international or regional political state or non-state actors, or too to be at any time sharing sovereignty over those decisions with any such international regional political state or non-state actors, whereby in the first place it has to answer to a higher authority from which there is no appeal by it to another.

    Hence, Well Well, though you did not say it expressly, you implied it in one of your last blogs directed to us …….. (Appears you still want to keep the bank, but you cannot do so unless you FOLLOW foreign banking rules and regulations), the suggestion that the Central Bank of Barbados once it remains in existence it has to FOLLOW these FOREIGN BANKING RULES AND REGULATIONS – which you have so far failed to identify!!!

    Well, though, we are going to use some research information we recently came across from the internet to show you that the Central Bank of Barbados – as a sovereign decision maker it self too and the government of Barbados by extension do not have to follow any foreign banking rules and regulations whatsoever, contrary to what you so suggested previously in a few of your blogs under this thread.

    This information, which is verily drawn from wikipedia.org, can be said by the PDC to be official information about two of these international bodies that are involved in the international banking and finance arena – the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and the Bank for International Settlements – and which are the purveyors

    So from this information on wikipedia.org, it appears that the Basel Committee is “a committee of banking supervisory authorities” that was established by the Central Bank Governors of a group of countries in 1974 – Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, UK, and the USA. It also appears that it is “a forum for regular COOPERATION on banking supervisory matters”, and that a major objective of it is “to enhance understanding of key supervisory issues and improve the quality of banking supervision worldwide”. It is said – by the research information we saw – that some of its other functions are to frame guidelines and standards in different areas such as international standards on capital adequacy, the concordat on cross border banking, etc.

    In addition to the original members mentioned earlier some other member governments have joined them since that time and up to this time point in time: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Kuwait, Luxemborg, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, and Turkey.

    It appears from wikipedia.org also that the Bank for International Settlements is a bank for some Central Banks across various parts of the world, and that it fosters international monetary and financial COOPERATION. The article also states that this bank was formed in 1930 by the governments of Germany, France, Belgium, Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Italy, Japan, and Switzerland, and that it was originally intended to facilitate reparations imposed on Germany by the governments who established the Treaty of Versailles. The article also states that there are now 58 members of this bank.

    It is clear from the information given on wikipedia.org, that these two groups of supra-national actors are each allied with the other by way of the fact that, et al, they are based in Basel, Switzerland, some countries serve in both of them, they are central bank based groupings and they appear to focus on some of the same areas such as capital adequacy and reserve requirements in banking supervision across international banking networks.

    It is also obvious from the information researched that the Central Bank of Barbados is not a member of any of them and by extension the government of Barbados.

    Now to get to our argument that the Central Bank of Barbados is not bound to follow any of the recommendations, guidelines or frameworks of these two or any other international regional political financial non-state actors unless it is a part of them and agrees with the decisions of them, and that therefore too whenever a coalition government of which the PDC will be a part of comes to office in this country that there will be no mistake on the coalition’s part about the reconfiguration of monetary financial and fiscal affairs of Barbados to suit the well-being and development of the people, we have to point out to you – to quell your anxieties doubts about our monetary proposals, called them that, the same information states that, et al, there is no founding treaty for the Basel Committee, that it does not issue binding regulations, that it does not have the authority to enforce recommendations and that most member countries as well as some other non-member countries tend TO IMPLEMENT the committees policies.

    With regard to the Bank for International Settlements, the research shows as well that this bank is not accountable to any single national government, which, for us, clearly means that no governments or groups of governments – sovereign powers – can get it to do their political bidding by way of its acting in sovereign fashions in relationship to other esp. non-member states and to issues surrounding their sovereignty.

    While it is true that the information we have seen put out on wikipedia.org about these two groups can be construed by us as official lines and that there might be more beneath the surface of those official lines that speak to the manipulation and control by them of aspects of the political financial systems of some other countries, we are strongly of the belief that in those cases where such might happen, that at the same time the present Governor of the Central Bank of Barbados would not seek to improve what he thinks would be the efficiency and effectiveness in certain areas of the operations and administrations of the Central Bank and of the wider core financial system in the country by without adopting some of those standards and proposals that would in fact help do so.

    So the promulgating on our part is that where such standards and proposals for say capital adequacy are adopted for use by the Central Bank of Barbados, they are done so in cooperation or consultation with the Basel Committee or the BIS, and not by it having to follow any guidelines or whatever.

    PDC

    Like

  • An inadvertence…,,,,

    It should have been …….. purveyors of a number of western financial ideologies, philosophies and psychologies.

    PDC

    Like

  • PDC…………………i am not the one who has to identify the international banking rules and regulations regional Central Banks in the Caribbean MUST adhere to, you are the one wanting to be the ruler of a whole country, you should be the one already familiar with SEC banking rules and regulations as well as other banking regulations coming out of Europe that governs regional and international banks. If you do not know of these, you are not ready yet.

    Like

  • It is clear then that what you are talking about you do NOT know anything much about.

    We have never told you anything about juxtaposing any foreign banking rules and regulations with the model that we have evolved.

    You have been the person instigating such.

    We were hoping that you would have added to what research information we would have taken the time out and gone and reproduced hopefully for the benefit of the understanding of persons who frequent this blog and to show up the downright deficiencies in your arguments.

    But nothing of the sort you have come up with.

    Since you continue to fail to identify these FOREIGN RULES and REGULATIONS, and fail to deliberately support your arguments in these particular political financial affairs which we take very seriously, because we are not in politics to trifle with the lives or emotions of the people , it means that we will have NO further contact with you whatsoever on this blog, at least under that handle.

    We are not about wasting precious time on this blog or anywhere else with any persons who are about such failed fallacious psuedo-intellectual counter-diversionary tactics as yours, as this country continues daily to sink and sink further down the drain and as thousands upon thousands of people suffer and live in destitution and misery for primary reasons that DLP/BLP Governments continue to destroy many of the social, political, material and financial affairs of this country.

    What this country needs right now is serious leadership and with the support of many people inside and outside of it we will continue to do so more and more as time goes by.

    Hence, this is no time for pulling such otherwise sick intellectual pranks!!!

    For, it is clearly obvious that you are seeking to sow in the minds of a few persons on this blogsite unfounded and irrational fears about things you do NOT know anything much about, far less these imaginary delusionary foreign effects that only you yourself only know about on our models, or these paranoidic relationships that only you yourself suppose you know exist between these imagined effects and our model.

    We apologize to all of those people who constantly read many of our BU posts and who tell us so and who really would have been expecting a better discussion between us, for this type of intellectual fiasco.

    So, What a shame!!

    What an extremely negative mind too as it relates to this case!!.

    PDC

    Like

  • PDC……………….you might find this hard to believe, but i spent quite a few years in the North American banking system in their legal department, so i think that would qualify me more than you to know about international banking laws and the rules and regulations governing such laws, it is your job as someone who wants to govern any country, to know what this entails………..good luck!!

    Like

  • PDC said:

    We were hoping that you would have added to what research information we would have taken the time out and gone and reproduced hopefully for the benefit of the understanding of persons who frequent this blog and to show up the downright deficiencies in your arguments.

    But nothing of the sort you have come up with.

    PDC…………………….so why did you not just ask me if i had any such experience or knowledge, instead of making it seem like what i was speaking about does not exist…………..for people to start taking you seriously, you really need to do a lot of homework before you can move forward.

    Like

Join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s