George Payne v Edmund Hinkson: Statement of Defense

Edmund Hinkson's SOD

Edmund Hinkson’s SOD

Related Links:



170 thoughts on “George Payne v Edmund Hinkson: Statement of Defense

  1. @ David | June 20, 2013 at 5:07 PM

    The answer to all your questions is: NO, NO, NO!
    Your source of such misleading indication is acting out of malice and partisan politician machinations to discredit MAM.

    But it is not MAM they need to fear since she at this stage is just a windbag of hot air.
    It is what is around the corner with a massive billboard with the alarming sign: “FOREX IN SERIOUS TROUBLE”.

    These diversionary tactics will not last for too long. Even if MAM is replaced tomorrow as the leader of the Opposition by Symmonds or Marshall or even Hinkson or Payne the scenario leading to a replay of the 1992 drama is still on, come rain or shine.
    But this time more intense with no bailout unless all of the IMF prescribed medicine is taken one after the other in quick succession.

    You, David, can rely on this source as a sure indication of what to come (and to quote Sinckler’s favourite phrase) very, very, very soon.

  2. miller u and your dire predictions,,,,,,,what about what happening now in the blp about time wunna members get a bush bathe,,,,

  3. @ ac | June 20, 2013 at 8:19 PM |

    Tell that to the 250 workers just laid off from the sugar industry or the thousands so far from the private sector with more to come in the coming weeks.

    Tell that also to the Guv of the Central Bank when he is forced to issue dire warnings next month even if the data on the economy is sugar coated to make for more palatable acceptance.
    Yes ac, continue to cuss the miller. Everything is fine and dandy in Bim and the economy is firing on all cylinders. Sounds familiar?

  4. @Onions
    this lil private matter between two old friends who rather than cuss and drink a brandy fro goodwill chose to litigate the matter is most unfortunate
    Onions old boy you too like yuh sardines, I remember you once wrote that you drive around with a couple of tins in the car but I digress. I know you would like it to be a “ bassa bassa” between two disgruntled members but the leader of your Party has been caught in the wake of the storm and has been accused of a very serious transgression in a public document and unless she moves to clear her name it will be on every Tom, Mick and Harry’s tongue in the next go around (pardon me for not saying Dick but I am a person with some sensibility).

    If I wuz you I would keep a low profile as these things are cyclical, let the Dems have their day soon the tables will be turned and you will have a go again like you did when the “Eager 11” made their play.

  5. Got to agree Amused, why NOT just apologize … It’s politics for Chis’ sake. Eddey does not have to be genuine. Stupse. Mek mah shame … a Barbados Exhibitionist and Commonwealth scholar … and can’ see the simple and least hurtful way out of all of this. Stupse … But maybe there is an endgame after all … not

  6. Miller
    Please remind me when was the last time the BLP professed a solution to the world recession and the consequent economic problems in Barbados.

  7. @ The Dummy @ Dumo | June 20, 2013 at 9:31 PM

    There is Nothing called “the world recession”, dummy!

    Unless you see the world through limited myopic Bajan eyes of yours.

    Unlike the Sun the World does not revolve around this 2×3 place no larger that a town in one of the smaller states in the American Bible belt.
    When you leave your little village you might just appreciate how you stand in the bigger scheme of things. Which part of Jamaica is Barbados, again?

  8. @Onion, “Cheap politidal…?
    You were using the poor woman with #1.29 to try to show how bad things were that you had to pull your pocket to help her. Didn’t they have people in the Salvation Army during your reign?I reminded you before “The poor will be always with us. What is important is how we treat them. It is worse to make those less fortunate than us know that your are not helping them out of concern but to :big up ” yourself. I pity you.

  9. @ Hants
    One a these nights he gine buy the frozen fish too late and dey ain’t gine thaw
    Happened already Hantsy…. Last week!
    …why do you think he came up with that wild and ridiculous story ’bout how the “police accosted him while fishing around 3.00 a.m. and how they “begged him for two fish”.
    …next he claims that “two more got away…” (Yea RIGHT!) and bout how one must have been Bushie

    He get ketch in the woman house and had to run for his life. He lost his car keys and by the time he got to buy the fish they were too frozen to thaw out….so he had to dump them and concoct that bogus story….
    Unfortunately for him, Bushie saw him in Paynes Bay sneaking around in the market with the stiff fish in he hand….. 🙂

  10. Miller
    Thanks, so can we take that as an admission that BLP has not identied any plans to address the economy?

  11. Could all this have been the workings of a superb strategic and implementation plan?

    Whichever Party won the Last election was likely to be in serious trouble during these current five years since it is unlikely that the winner would be able to see any of the actual political fruits of their efforts to right the economy (and society) in any significant way during this time.

    The party which won the last election would therefore be unlikely to win the next one. By losing that election the BLP gave themselves a shot to benefit from any austerity or other measures that the DLP would put in place during this period. Mottley was also able to get her arch enemy OSA routed.

    By winning the election the DLP actually shot themselves in the foot. They have to implement serious austerity measures and they had to retain a leader who is unable to lead sensibly. FS will continue to be a millstone around the DLP’s neck until the next election. Winning this election was the worst thing that could have happened to the DLP

    It was not in the BLP’s or Mia’s best interests for the BLP to have won the last election. Don’t underestimate Mia! Machiavelli lives!

  12. The Dummy @ Dumo | June 20, 2013 at 10:06 PM |
    “Miller: Thanks, so can we take that as an admission that BLP has not identied any plans to address the economy?”

    Are you also admitting that the DLP don’t know their elbow from their arse as far as managing the economy in challenging times?
    You claim the people of Barbados elected the DLP to manage their affairs and rejected the BLP accordingly.
    Why should the BLP have plans to address the economy? They do not form the government.
    The so-called people’s choice are the ones answerable to the people, get it dummy?

    Now why would you want anyway to hear or accept anything from a party that you claim is responsible for 14 years of mismanagement, inept governance, corruption and characterised by a total lack of moral rectitude, all of which has landed the country in the morass it is in today?
    This has been your signature tune for the last 5 years. Nothing has changed in the BLP so why would you want them to assist you? Aren’t you afraid of the contamination?

    Now get on with the people’s work before they fire you lot before your “stolen” time is up; just like Darwin!

  13. @ Alvin
    Your poor brain cells seems to be so twisted that you cannot differentiate between an honest deed done impulsively out of the depths of ones heart and other bequest. Even you Alvin I am sure would have reacted the same way on seeing what unfolded……as a matter of fact I was standing in the doorway of the establishment, in conversation with a friend and not a customer in the line, when I was taken back by the poor child’s plight …and cannoned into action….But I dun know you all just grating onion for a lil cheap political sport …that I can live with

    @ Sarge
    You just love to fire subliminal pot shots at the ole man nuh?..anything to make a cryin voice in the wilderness go away… I guess you would also recommend me not to go fishing(the reason for keepin sardine oil) at night (AGAIN) either… cuz even monikers of social media will soon be hunted down, and should shut up now the German Panza tanks are on the move right Sarge? Based on what I am seeing… there is merit in your warning..thanks ole friend.

  14. @millertheanunnaki | June 20, 2013 at 7:53 PM | Unfortunately, you are absolutely right.

    @Baffy. I can never understand what people find so difficult about an apology. It does not diminish a person, it enhances them.

  15. @ Amused & Jeff Cumberbatch
    I shall certainly defer to you both , the one the lawyer , the other the academic . But what about that rule of pleading that you plead FACTS and NOT evidence? Cheltenham’s defence seems to me to be nothing but EVIDENCE . Certainly most of it can be struck out .

  16. @ Jeff Cumberbatch !
    You state that the defence of qualified privilege is based on “a legal moral or social duty on the part of the speaker to publish the statement and a corresponding duty or interest in the hearer to receive it .” Are you saying that this should cover Hinkson for publishing what Payne complained of , namely that he is a criminal , a fraudster , unfit to be a member of Parliament and a Queens Counsel and should be in prison? Maybe you should go back to the statement of case and examine Payne’s complaint .

  17. @ Bushie
    I give up!..BU has become an Attack Dog court, where accusers are given credence as bearers of gospel…and poor defendants are guilty until proven innocent.. Look what they did when OAS was at top,Look what they now attempting on MAM..This hung man’s court even extended to supporters..Look what they NOW attempting with Onions…

    Man what frozen fish story you bring in here for this household? Evabody knows Gibber is a master craftsman on the water when it comes to landing game fish….What buy what frozen fish ya talking Mr. Downunder?…all the vendors in Paynes Bay can attest to having taken dolphins, kingfish, marlins and Blue Peter shark from onions when he has excess…even the coast guard know onions….Man Bushie you have lost all creditability on this one…tekk a billfish beak juck for dat ..LOL

  18. @ Onions
    You think Bushie just come…?
    Check your story….
    1- You was out fishing at 3.00 a.m.
    .YOU!!? A big frighten man like you? NO WAY ONIONS…. You don’t even like to go to the bathroom after midnight….

    2- Two policemen accosted you
    ….Onions!! Nobody don’t even see a policeman at midday on Broad Street and you butt up on TWO in the sea at 3.00 am? Steupssss

    3- They ask you for two of the fish…..
    ….BAJAN COPS?! Any Bajan cop woulda give you two slaps and tek way ALL your fish….

    4- Two of the fish “get away”
    ….shiite man Onions….they were resurrected? Fish don’t die nowadays when you take them from the sea? These two wake up and run…? Steupssss

    ….too many holes in that story Old boy…. Bushie sticking with the outside woman explanation. …LOL..Sorry the man didn’t catch yuh!

  19. @Befuddled @ 6:56am
    Yes. Once the occasion is covered by qualified privilege, then in the absence of proof of malice, it will excuse a defamatory publication.

  20. @ Bushie

    I not letting you get away so EZ….I had to go back to the thread “Comm.Dottin Leaves”….to support my case…annyda bill fish beak juck…

    FAMILY YOU B THE JUDGE….( beware of Bushie the contortionist)

    old onion bags | June 18, 2013 at 8:11 AM |

    What is going on bout here doh?…..Imagine last nite pun Shoal Bank..I hook two barracudas and a dozen blow goats ( mabe one Bushie) and a Constable pun the high seas ask me ….what I doing out hay? Wha people like dey gine madd……now this jack-palance I open BU to find 4.00am tis morning…I thought it did the Black and went back to sleep only to find is true ( none a den blow goats din Bushie) and Hott water being poured on Dottin….Onions is a famine for the way..morning all…wha really gine on bredds?

    …..where did I say I was on Shoal Bank at 3.00am or they did ‘ land police’?

    mo bill fish beakk…for ya…tekk dat

  21. Bushie

    Din you hear from EWB.?.
    … we the sheeple shud shun Coleridge St.?
    esp. when strangers to the truths…whaloss !

  22. This clearly demonstrates that the BLP is a seriously divided party and that the electorate were right to return the DLP government to power. The BLP has alot of work to do and it falls to the Leader of the Opposition to resolve this issue before the party sustains any more damage to its reputation. The BLP lost the last election principally because the Government was able to demonise OSA and show that a seriious rife existed between Mottley and Arthur.

    In her first trial as new Leader of the Opposition, Mia has stumbled and this is only the first hurdle, an internal one at that. If Mia cannot control a first Parliamentarian like Hinkson then what does that say about her leadership capabilities?

  23. old onion bags | June 21, 2013 at 7:41 AM |

    @ Bushie
    I give up!..BU has become an Attack Dog court, where accusers are given credence as bearers of gospel…and poor defendants are guilty until proven innocent.. Look what they did when OAS was at top,Look what they now attempting on MAM..This hung man’s court even extended to supporters..Look what they NOW attempting with Onions…

    …see what ah mean… I REST MY CASE

  24. Bushie

    Ya gone…..did I not tell ya never bring up ya railings NEAR onions’ palings?

    LOL….he gone fa trute ?…and dat go for evabody….

  25. BU was not an attack dog of the BLP prior to the elections when ones like you were spewing your lies and fantasy stories all of which came to nothing as your party was battling on two fronts the DLP election faction and the Mottley faction the end result is that the electorate kept the BLP in Opposition where they will put daggers in each other left right and centre.

  26. @Befuddled !!!. | June 21, 2013 at 3:29 AM | and later. Jeff and I have differing views on whether qualified privilege will fly on this one. That said, I cannot dismiss Jeff’s argument out of hand – he may be right and me wrong. I don’t think so, but it is possible and we shall see.

    In his response to you, however, Jeff has hit right at the rub, which is malice. Hinckson’s habitual conduct and public comments prior to the meeting tend to show a habit towards malice, making the claim that his comments to Payne lack malice, somewhat difficult to support and all to easy for Payne to prove.

    I have already discussed, with more than passing amusement, the possibility of extending the defense that Hinckson was defending himself, to Hinckson’s defense of Mia. I note that Jeff has chosen not to go there, which is very wise of him as I doubt he could persuade any Bajan living that Mia needs Hinckson’s protection from anything.

    To avail himself of the defense of truth, Hinckson must provide evidence of his accusations against Payne. Rumour will not cut it.

    The SOD is replete with opinion evidence, speculation, hearsay and unsupported and malicious allegations that, having been given in court documents, are covered by absolute, not qualified, privilege. Over 80% of the SOD is opinion, speculation and hearsay, unsupported by a single piece of documentary evidence. No good saying that Hinckson will produce the evidence later. Not good enough. Jeff will confirm that if you make the statement or express the opinion in court pleadings, you must support it right there and then by an exhibit or exhibits. Hinckson has not done this. And as 80% of the SOD is inadmissible as a result and ought, by rights, to fall in limine, then the entire SOD should be struck out.

    Personally, I think that the making of scandalous and unsupported accusations from behind the privilege of the court is the lowest of the low, behaviour-wise and I am distressed but, in Barbados, not surprised that a senior queens counsel and a knight of St Andrews would allow himself to participate in such practices.

    Right at the start of this thread, BU’s agent provocateur par excellence, Baffy, suggested (he did not ask, but suggested) the question as to who would benefit the most. I am trying to figure that out for myself. No luck so far. The costs of the case itself will run, in terms of legal costs, about $350,000 for both sides. Given the circumstances, the quantum of damages (if Hinckson loses) is highly unlikely to exceed $150,000 – in fact, I would put it at more like $25,000 or less. So we are looking at half a million dollars tops. However, the collateral advantages of the case in terms of politics, are MUCH higher and I would place these at about $10 million. Not in cash, you understand – at least only later on when the political objective has been achieved and the financial rape of Barbados can be appropriated from the current rapists by the new rapists.

    Since I cannot answer the question about who will benefit the most from the collateral advantages, maybe members of the BU family can suggest answers. I do think, however, that whoever is looking to win the collateral, likely doesn’t give a damn whether Payne wins or Hinckson wins. That is the sad part.

  27. Amused
    but upon Mia asking Hinkson to apologise reservedly to Payne, the idiot Hinkson is rumoured to have told Mia “keep your nasty nose out of my business before I take a turn in you too”

  28. I have listened to him in the house and without wanting to malign the mans reputation, tattered as it is, I think he need medicating. Can someone tell the idiot that the reason for being in Parliament is not fight but debating to the benefit of one constituents.

  29. Acme

    I know Eddie fah real long den … and I got to tell you, that what you have said does NOT sound like Eddie. My issue is that he chose from early to be part of a partisan campaign. He defended his Party and Prime Minister at every turn, even if it meant drawing a frown from the fellas, and where as so many lawyers of that generation switched parties (like Ralph) or just grew disillusioned with the process (to my mind rightfully so), Eddy held firm. He is a committed party man (not my cup of tea of course) but I doubt he can be considered a maverick by any stretch of the imagination …

  30. Qualified privilege

    There are many situations where the courts have recognised that it is in the interests of society that people be able to communicate frankly with each other, without fear of a defamation action. The defence of “qualified privilege” protects honest communications on such occasions. If a communication is covered by qualified privilege, a plaintiff can only succeed in an action for defamation by showing, in addition to the usual matters which must be proved, that the defendant was motivated by malice in making the statement.
    “Malice” means that that the statement was made for some ulterior purpose, and not for the purpose that qualified privilege is intended to protect. Usually if the plaintiff can prove that the defendant knew that the statement was not true (or did not care if it was true or false) this will be treated as proving malice, since it is rare that the maker of a statement will have a proper purpose in circumstances where they are aware that the statement is untrue. The defendant’s negligence in not checking whether what was said was true or false does not amount to malice, provided that such negligence does not amount to an indifference to the truth.
    Intending to cause harm to someone will usually be regarded as an improper purpose, and therefore as proof of malice. However, this is not always the case, especially in relation to political speech; where an intention to damage the chances of success of a candidate for election is considered a proper purpose of the qualified privilege that exists between a person commenting on the candidates and the electors.

  31. I give up!..BU has become an Attack Dog court, where accusers are given credence as bearers of gospel…and poor defendants are guilty until proven innocent.. Look what they did when OAS was at top,Look what they now attempting on MAM..This hung man’s court even extended to supporters…….pittbulls congregate in BU just for being ugly.

  32. Well done, ac , except for the last paragraph where you should note that our Act is different- see section 33

  33. @ Jeff
    What ac what?!
    Come on prof. ….you well know that is the “skipper” who apparently is back from Arizona…
    ….can’t see how restrained (or is it drained) she has been lately…? Not a single word of abuse for the bushman…. 🙂

  34. Listen Old Bags you ain’t going to extract an ounce of sympathy from a soul not when the main Traitor and Thief continue to act as if she is right and has the right to be dishonest and go about life like she is beyond being blamed or charged for her wrong doings

  35. Why you attack dogs don’t give it a rest……When OSA was at the top …ya attack HE… Mia at the top wanna attack SHE…..Onions went fishing in he boat.. back pun land ..a Bush dog attack he…..good ting onions was carry he billfish beak.. I hear arp arp arp arp…when I pelt it in he brassbowl..whaloss!

  36. Onions, yuh aint got nuh blasted shame, you does be on this blog castigating left right and center, berating the PM, and everyone on the DLP side. The only dog i hear yapping is you, beggin for ya supper. Partisan politics got you blind. Im actually quite glad that the upcoming generation(s) don’t seems to be as enthralled as you and your ilk.

  37. BUSHIE

  38. @Onions
    Why you attack dogs don’t give it a rest……When OSA was at the top …ya attack HE… Mia at the top wanna attack SHE
    Look like you want the public to treat your favourite politicians with kid gloves. The fact is that at the BLP’s first post- election meeting the air was filled with accusations, counter charges and alleged slanderous remarks and Mia was unable to control the antagonists

    Whatever one thinks of Owen these bantam weights wouldn’t treat him with that disrespect. This lawsuit is unparalleled in Barbados history and people will be talking about it so get used to it or stop reading the newspapers, blogs and turn off the TV and radio.

    Better yet become a hermit.

  39. ac

    Jesus Chris’ … man da is serious comedy … WUH LASS … I AIN’ CRYING NA MO .. I DYING …. MURDA … LARD COME FUH YAH WORL’, DO … HA HA HA HA

  40. @BAFBFP | June 21, 2013 at 4:43 PM | I don’t know him, but your instincts and insights (when you choose to give them) are always on target. So I am going to withdraw my last comment.

    @Bushie. Man, like they got it in for you. You has best hope that Islandgal don’t join.

  41. @ Jeff Cumberbatch & Amused
    Thanks Jeff for your response . the position is therefore quite interesting ; I dont know when last I have seen such MALICE being played out by/among individuals .

  42. @ Amused
    @Bushie. Man, like they got it in for you. You has best hope that Islandgal don’t join.
    Let them gather….soon they shall scatter… 🙂
    ….especially Onions!

  43. I believe that given the sceanrio and place of venue and enviroment the heated debate and responsibilty of choosing a leader. the stament of malice would be unprovable and unfounded.clearly this was an attempt by hinckson to undo what damage payne would have inflicted on MIA charcter by his allegations which would have cast sufficient or reasonable doubt on her becoming leader .simply put hinkson statements in reality said “He who is without sin cast the first stone. Malice NO, Justifiable with reasonYES

  44. i am hearing that a meeting has been called on Monday by the elders of the BLP to put an end to this Hinkson / Payne / Mottley fiasco and address Mottley’s / Dottin’s relationship, it is also reported that Arthur has been asked to be present, is this the third coming of Arthur ?
    If the call of the elders is for Mottley to step aside and let someone who is not Damaged Goods lead the party, not sure what the meetings holds for her or Payne but at least the older heads are trying to regain some order to a very corrupt party just now, Mottley is clearly not honest and clearly not the material based on Payne and Marshall’s observations of her actions and further based on Arthur’s statement from UWI that she had to rid herself of her Demons and that because of life style she was unfit to lead the BLP or the Nation of Barbados.

  45. Where this place called Arizona is … I wanta go cause like dey gpt somet’ing in the air that is mek yah talk sense. I wants ta go to Arizona… HA HA HA … and come back an’ try contributing to BU agen … HA HA HA

  46. The Nation newspaper aint touching the Hinckson rebuttal they more interested in stirring up criticism and attacks on the Dems over Dottin. Is the fellow Eric Smith who take over from Kamar Jordan a B, a D, a neutral? The anti DLP editorials and articles have increased. The Nation newspaper staying the course as the governents’s biggest adversary apart from the BLP and the Hotel Association.

  47. walter

    ……why go after maybes…..when you got nice big de-feathered birds in the bush? Think the Nation duz run on H2O?….Headliners does mean bucks for the paper and Dottin is still top tune..ya sight?

  48. Let us not forget this report either, The theme was: ‘Charting a New Direction,’ but the 72nd Conference of the Barbados Labour Party ended in anarchy. The general feeling of the delegates who attended was that it was the worst and most disorganized Conference in the party’s 72 year history. Resolutions submitted to the party were not communicated to delegates and naturally the Conference found that horrifying.
    The lame excuse of the printer not working was advanced so too the excuse that Branches had submitted Resolutions late. The Conference might have believed that froth until it was explained that the same Resolutions alleged to have been submitted by Branches to party headquarters, late – were actually sent to an Attorney on last Friday for vetting. By then the room was in an uproar.

    All I can say is that under its present leadership, there is disquiet in the hive while a clear message of “bullying, arrogance and defiance” is being send by the Barbados Labour Party, even after being told by the electorate two and half years ago, that it needed to change and repackage itself.

    “To the share horror of most, the divided BLP is now behaving as though it feels that the people of Barbados are either stupid or have short memories because it is again being led and dominated by the same people who the electorate expressed concern about in 2008. “

    The Resolution that was derailed yesterday is evidence that the BLP is not motivated to change on it own and is resisting any attempt at such from within. Therefore, in the interest of democracy, and given this scenario which the people of Barbados finds unacceptable, it now falls on the electorate to “force change within that organization.“

    This is easy, since it is clear that the BLP is split into two faction, albeit that one half of the BLP seems united 100% behind Mia Mottley, who clearly has an agenda for change, which is consistent with the instructions given by the electorate in 2008. Mia Mottley had advanced a slate of clean and competent candidates but it is left to be seen if they will now “B-selected.”

    If the BLP Conference shows one thing, it is that Mia Mottley appears to be the sole catalyst for change and healing within that organisation. That fact obviously has not escaped a frail and tired looking Owen Arthur, who said publicly that the BLP and Barbados needs Mia Mottley. Surely Arthur is aware that such a statement, serves as a vote of no-confidence in the four who recently made him leader. Still, the point remains that to-date, Mia Mottley has outlined the only credible plan or vision of a new politics and development path for Barbados.

    It was not difficult to see that Mia Mottley was the highpoint of the Conference over the three days it was held. This is highly unusual because Owen Arthur was expected to have been the main event. Unfortunately, his speech was flat and offered no hope to Barbadians. A number of delegates who attended were overheard saying that it was ‘warm over cold soup’ and they heard it before. Ironically, the part of Arthur’s speech that was boisterously applauded was when he said that Barbados and the BLP needs Mia Mottley.

    There can be no denying that under Mia Mottley’s dynamic and progressive leadership, the BLP was a political institution that was united and served as a beacon of hope for Barbadians on both side of the political divide. It is also obvious that Mia Mottley has a clear plan for the continued transforming of this country, and was already utilizing he best Barbadian talent and innovation in the national interest.

    It is therefore sad that such a laudable cause has been derailed and despite a Conference theme of: ‘Charting a New Direction,’ the BLP’s slide continues with Grantley Adam’s Party now on a Fast Free Fall From relevance and stability to Crisis.

    This is something that would have been unfathomable four months ago, much less two years ago, when Mia Mottley was taking on a Prime Minister Thompson, then in his element.

    Today, while ‘the-gang-of-five’ is quick to talk about their right to choose and the will of the majority, they seem oblivious to the fact that they are resisting all and any attempt for greater transparency, accountability, democracy and good governance within the BLP, having derailed the introduction of a system of: “one-man-one-vote,” as proposed by four Branches of the party who want change. The lords of the BLP seem determined to suppress all and any opposition as well as to place a gag order on any and all dissenting views.

    Owen Arthur spoke about discipline within the party and using the internal systems to settle concerns and disputes, yet on the very day that Parliament was meeting, he called a media conference at the UWI to cuss Mia Mottley.
    And so what was witnessed at the 72nd BLP Conference is the fortification of maguffy policies and the emergence of dictatorial politics within the party that Grantley Adam’s formed.

    No one expected that the BLP would ever seek to suppress the views of the “MAJORITY” of its total membership or slam the door shut on a system of one-man-one-vote, as Grantley Adams – the founding father of that party – had intended for the country. This is usually the case in societies where the rulers feel that the populace are stupid and are incapable of making wise decision.

    And so, this 72nd Conference was an insult to the legacy of the Rt. Excellent Sir Grantley Adams and shows a BLP under its present leadership – ‘charting a new direction’ away from Grantley Adam’s vision.
    Rarely has a political institution fallen so far from grace and as fast as the divided Barbados Labour Party. And while its slide is intensifying daily with the ousting of Mia Mottley as Political Leader and Leader of the Opposition, the arrival of this ugly moment is still a staggering blow, particularly for women and anyone who loves and respects our National Hero – The Rt. Excellent Grantley Adams.

    Delegates literally left the BLP conference in tears, depressed and deflated that their party had denied them the right to have a say in the formulation of the rules and the governance procedures of the party. Under its new leadership, it is not about service but power and dominance and being the lord and masters of the people.

    The ousting of Mia Mottley has therefore triggered a slow and painful process and the implosion of the BLP. The seriousness Mia Mottley brought to national debate and to addressing social and economic issues, has vanished as the old boys club, once more lords over the people as their masters.

  49. @ Give Up Do…

    Man you know what wanna sound like….. a pack of dejected hyenas that attempted to FALL a giraffe …bite up all the animal foot and still ent get nuttin …for they still hungry as hell …all but the taste of blood…..Now the animal tekk off and galloping on the savannah….wanna groping , and wishing and talking to wanna self…..tekk Bushie advice son….if greedy would wait , hot would cool…wanna too FAST

  50. corr : I mean Give us a Break ….who just write that lonnng roll-a-shiite above…real semblance to toilet paper den

  51. It was written by one of your own, sad but true.

    This one isn’t going away Mr BLP ! i know it must be painful to see you dirty linen being thrown around in the public domain but more importantly how does it feel to be touting for the BLP knowing full well you got a crook a thief a traitor to your party and a person who instructs the C of P who’s phones to Wire Tap and listen to their private calls ?

    Were I you rather than trying to defend the defenceless you should be saying sorry to innocent Barbadians that your party traitor leader inflicted on good honest Barbadians, for you to come on here with your party mouth relegates you to the same class and one that condones corruption, theft and fraud and wire tapping, think on these things do you not have more honour that to defend the defenceless ?

  52. …blasted liar….I musse real difficult foe a D to see the 16-14 predicament nah ?…all this diversion YOu sent here wid…before wanna tell the Bajan public the truth….have no fear…Breaka breaka….soon Moody will

  53. The BLP matter with Payne and Hinkson needs to be resolved before the BLP’s AGM. How can they head into the AGM with this matter looming over their heads?

    What happens if other people at the Meeting are called to give evidence, knowing our political “unbiased” court system, this matter will be heard just before elections are called.

    My take is to expel both, Enter Douglas Skeete for St James and Stuart Mottley for St Andrew.

    MAM MUST ACT NOW. There is nothing to lose, you have lost the election already. It is time to show leadership and no one is going to cross the floor.

  54. Like it or Lump it they often say Mottley has balls this is one such time we will see how big her balls really are, she herself is not blameless either, the charges of theft of party monies, being a traitor and her role in the Wire Tapping fiasco is not to be taken lightly.

  55. Today could well be a make or break day in the life of motley the outcome of the meeting this evening holds her future in the balance, in comes Arthur and swoops Mottley out and may swoop Dale to office.

  56. Funny that Mottley suddenly can’t handle her own kitchen fire – George Payne v Edmund Hinkson – gets out on the street to communicate with the public, comes here to the BU, post comment and the Barbados Free Press the same. The PAC meeting that convened 06/18/2013 was temporarily suspended but not before Minister Inniss embarrassed her badly, Mia Mottley and not before she embarrassed herself. Does she know what she is doing?

    Interesting that Mia Mottley and Dale Marshall are demanding answers from Prime Minister Stuart concerning Dottin. Interesting, neither one of them demanded answers and or a thorough investigation concerning those Britton Hill deaths.

  57. I really do not want to discuss the George Payne versus Edmund Hinkson issue,but it behooves me that two so-called “men” could be behaving so childish. These are the people who are the representatives of thousands of Barbadians. No wonder this country is regressing. A bunch of nincompoops on both sides administering the affairs of this country.
    This is a silly issue that could have been resolved at the party level and it should not have reach the stage it is presently at.
    Incompetent leader with a bunch of “little children” that is the Barbados labour Party today.No wonder the Democratic Labour Party headed by the contemptuous and arrogant Freundel Stuart won the last general elections
    The Barbados Labour Party in its present state is not fit to lead Barbados at this stage.I hope it remains in opposition for a very long time maybe the next ten or fifteen years..

Leave a comment, join the discussion.