← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

Personally I think the Speaker should do the right and honourable thing (pending the decision of the committee of privileges) and vacate the chair of Speaker. Morality and dignity should not have to be forced, negotiated and the subject of legal gymnastics – Grace Fuller

The Michael Carrington saga has shifted a gear.

Last week when Speaker of the House recused himself from the Chair to allow Deputy Speaker Mara Thompson to refer his matter  – Speaker of the House Michael Carrington MUST Go! –  to the moribund Committee of Privileges, there was high expectation the sordid matter of Griffiths Vs. Carrington was being ‘processed’ in a dignified manner by the highest Court in the land.  To the surprise of many Carrington presented himself today to carryon business as usual in the House on the pretext that he is still the Speaker of the House. Carrington’s decision aroused the passion of the perennially taciturn Prime Minister who in a passionate defence of the Speaker, on the floor of what was once an august chamber, questioned how a personal matter was being used to bar the Speaker from doing his job.

Obviously the decision by the Prime Minister to support Speaker Carrington is politically motivated. He continues to lead a weak government with a 2-seat majority which leaves no wiggle room to flex the muscle of the office of Prime Minister, an office Barbadians have come to regard as primus inter pares, until now. Seven years in office and what we have is a deeply polarized country which has forced national priories to be forgotten.

Surely any 7 year old knows that individuals who hold an office of public trust must be sensitive to activities undertaken in a  private capacity which may injure the office and is therefore open to censure based on the breath of the breech.  Employees of most organizations are aware if codes of conduct are contravened there is a consequence one has to endure.

If we accept the House of Assemble is the highest court in the land responsible for enacting laws and shaping government policies. Further, if we accept a key responsibility of Speaker is to maintain the integrity of parliament then one is left to surmise the decision by Carrington to fight for his job supports the growing view that Barbados has become a banana republic or in Bajan vernacular, poorakey.

How on this earth and anywhere in the galaxy a Speaker of a House of Assembly in the Commonwealth – acting in a private capacity as lawyer has to be ordered by a High Court to pay $200,000.0 plus to a wheel chair bound client withheld for 2 years, and he has the effrontery to defend his right to preside over the highest court in the land. To compound the problem, the prime minister and other members of parliament see the matter through politically tinted lenses while ignoring what is obviously wrong by the loosest value set.

Then there is the wider issue of governance. The Opposition correctly ‘walked out’ of parliament to demonstrate opposition to the decision by the Speaker – which sides with public opinion –  but the government continued to crunch out laws in our system of democracy. What flavour of democracy can this be?

The BU household weeps for our once proud little country.


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

207 responses to “Speaker Michael Carrington Saga: Day When Morality Drained From the House of Assembly”

  1. Caswell Franklyn Avatar

    David

    It wouldn’t have been slam dunk but it would have been the correct thing to do. Don’t ask him to explain his conduct to the House. Force him to explain his actions by bringing a motion of no confidence and that would in effect have put him on trial. Santia’s intervention guaranteed that he would not have to address the House. With a no confidence pending before the House, it would have been improper for him to preside over the House.

    The added advantage for the Opposition would have been the spectacle of the Government side defending Carrington’s conduct in a public forum. It would appear that the Opposition is only doing enough to make the Government uncomfortable but they are not interested in taking over the reins of Government at this time. Maybe, they want to see the economy starting to improve before they make their putsch for power.

    >


  2. Point taken Caswell, maybe they just wanted to expose another moribund Committee of parliament. Has the Committee of Privileges ever rule on any matter in the history of parliament? If so what.

  3. Caswell Franklyn Avatar

    David

    I have often said that our system of governance is a parody of what should really take place. Yes we have all the committees that are necessary to appear as though everything is okay but they don’t work and I don’t think that they were intended to work.

    Below is a link to an article that I wrote in 2011that you might find interesting:

    https://barbadosunderground.wordpress.com/2011/12/28/barbados-imitation-democracy/

    >


  4. Caswell,

    That was my point from day one.

    Why has Mottley not called for the resignation of Michael Carrington?

    Karibu connection!

    Why has Cynthia Forde, Michael Carrington cousin, remain silent?

    Family ties!

    Why has Dale Marshall, Michael Carrington buddy, remain silent?

    Karibu connection!


  5. Froon was obliged to support him. Birds of a feather flock together, so Froon more than likely does not see anything wrong with stealing people’s money.


  6. Caswell you mean a No Confidence like the one against Sinckler that no one from the Government responded to? If Carrington did not even defend the matter in court, it ids highly unlikely he would jave done so in a motipn. Furthermore the action/inaction of the PM and other members on the government benches tell us exactly what the outcome of suchbs motion would be.


  7. On point of privilege as a long standing member of the BU Court,/ Parliament. I would like to contend that the claimant BLP wisely followed the directives and rules of the legal system as well as the laws as (they are) and should be adjudicated in the Barbados Constitution,
    The defendant (himself) has been issued a directive from the highest court of the land,
    Failing to follow should be self sufficient reason by the Claimant /s to pursue due process under the rules and declarations in the Barbados Constitution that (should) be adhere governing'( goverance) any misappropriate behaviour or activity(ies) by any of the members of the House
    Commonsense should be uttermost of the importance while pursuing, disallowing emotion and sensationalism be the triggers aliken to a freight train that fell off the tracks after it has lost its wheels.


  8. Can we have consensus we have a government that is morally and ethically bankrupt? Did the Prime Minister confirm it? Say what you want about Arthur, Carrington would gave been out on his head.


  9. ac
    Did you complete secondary school, or were you just drunk when you wrote that nonsense above?
    Is it true that MC has compounded the problem by not carrying either of the Judge’s directives, 1) render an account or 2) pay the client the money claimed?


  10. David
    The Speaker must know that he is not going to be able to continue with risking:-
    1. Damage to the institution of Parliament
    2. Position of Speaker of the House
    3. His reputation and legal practice
    4. The Stuart administration
    5. A vote of no confidence being brought against him

  11. are-we-there-yet Avatar
    are-we-there-yet

    Norst;

    Did ac answer your question in her 7:11 am post? Reading between the lines it sounds so to me.

    If so, murdahhhhhhhh!


  12. Norse the invader….risking? The deed has been done the speaker has damaged himself, the House and Barbados beyond repair. We are truly failed state and worst than a Banana Republic!

  13. are-we-there-yet Avatar
    are-we-there-yet

    If I read ac correctly something very big is afoot.


  14. @Norst

    Some on the blog like to try to maintain their relevance at any cost. The only one who takes them seriously is are-we-there-yet.

    The government predictably will take a position us against them. Let us see how it works because practically all of Barbados is anti Carrington except the shadows with certain interest.


  15. Norst maybe i believe the above allegation towards ac should be directed at yourself, that being (said)you have no substance of proof as to at whether the monies were paid as of to date Furthermore the judges orders are plain and clear as to the time frame allowed for the funds to be released,
    This case is still under the guidelines of client attorney privilege until the court decides further action necessary and there is not a damn thing you or anyone can say or do to differ


  16. This discussion has been anchored in the political realm like most discussions in Barbados but Michael Carrington has violated several Code of ethics of the profession. Will the BA sanction him? Waiting on Tariq Khan patiently.


  17. What a JA.

  18. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    Enuff

    I refer to your comment at 6:18.

    This time around the Opposition should not allow itself to be outfoxed. All 13 of them should get up and speak whether or not the Government side participates in the debate. If the Government side then votes in a division to support Carrington’s conduct, they would do irreparable harm to their standing in the country for all, including their purblind supporters, to see.


  19. Tariq Khan? A man who went to court and argued that a fiduciary trustee does not have to set aside those trust funds and in fact are permitted to commingle them with other monies of the trustee and use them in the course of their business.


  20. Agree with you Caswell the time to express civil disobedience is now. The government side must gave it within their ranks to make ruling a task come next week. Public sentiment is with them. BU listened to James Paul as Chairman of Committee ruling with done arrogance yesterday when Hinkson was on his feet.


  21. @Norst

    How was Tariq selected as BA’s president by his peers?


  22. There is so such thing as a high class thief or a lower class thief in the eyes of the law only fractured people. Nor can a man be deemed honourable after the dishonourable…. integrity cannot be taught for such comes from within…regardless of the inhibitations of rules, improper conduct in our highest court in the land cannot be viewed by the People as a Govt with meritocracy….this now crescendo by the pedagogue of monumental silence has proclaims to all their probity….morality was backbenched yesterday, and ignomity was given proclivity to phoenix.


  23. cause no one else probably wanted it. I hard to do nothing, and bajans don’t want/like hard work.

  24. pieceuhderockyeahright Avatar
    pieceuhderockyeahright

    @ Mr. Caswell Franklyn

    Indeed, when one regards submissions of persons posting here in the BU blogosphere variously called the BU Rumshop or of late BU Court by Legion/AC, every once in a while you come across some sterling contributions some gems of observation

    Your “Maybe, they want to see the economy starting to improve before they make their putsch for power…” befits a Merlin the Bu-Ian magician much like the sage Miller the Annunaki

    Taking over the driver seat of this runaway stagecoach is NOT an easy proposition in light of dwindling monies to do the business of government and governing.

    Let us for a while pause to block out what I call “the common denominator”

    You, being a more seasoned speaker than the ole man would find better words to apply to the constant cadre of tiefing ministers and senators that BOTH sides of our political spectrum, peeple that you and I vote for religiously, bequeath us Bajans.

    Let us for the sake of argument accept that we will always have a section of our administration populated by “the common denominator” de ole man was just wondering how, like the exercises dat going on in mapping the gene and ting, how we could put something in the mix, Mr Franklyn to sweeten the “myrrh of existence and suffering” that life in Bulbados has become for the last 30 years.

    Let us not fool ourselves this cvntry has been a runaway stagecoach for three decades incestuously churning the same gene pool, sine any improvements, generating foreign exchange from de tourists dem, building and selling real estate, creating an illusion dat ting happening yet achieving a net deficit where our cvntry is concerned in every sphere of national endeavour.

    Caswell, like Bizzy does do at every public occasion, I does cry too inwardly when I see where our cvntry is and it is my belief that IF WE AS A NATION DONT SERIOUSLY LOOK TO CHANGE, WE WILL DIE


  25. The DLP is dead.
    It is only a matter now of whether they will take Barbados to the grave with them.

    The intervention yesterday by the Prime Minister was the single worst display of public idiocy in living memory, and even worse than a thief insisting on his right to preside over the island’s highest court.

    If our Law courts have been allowed to bring themselves into such disrepute over the last 20 years without any apparent concern, it was only inevitable that the Parliament would expose itself similarly…..

    Same players.

  26. pieceuhderockyeahright Avatar
    pieceuhderockyeahright

    @ Nordst the invader

    ” Norst the Invader January 21, 2015 at 7:55 AM #
    Tariq Khan? A man who went to court and argued that a fiduciary trustee does not have to set aside those trust funds and in fact are permitted to commingle them with other monies of the trustee and use them in the course of their business.”

    it finally has started.

    Here is “one more man with balls” who has come out to remark on the true colors of Tariq Khan, leader of what many a BAJAN would call “the League of 95% Demons”

    If there is one site that is going to break records David [BU] is that “Legal Reports on BAJAN Attorney Indiscretions” facility when you make it available

  27. Mr Watson Parkinson Avatar
    Mr Watson Parkinson

    Parliament has exposed itself…! The speaker is quite within his rights to stay put… He has been convicted of doing nothing wrong by a court in barbados…! Until he’s tried and convicted for a crime leave him well alone!


  28. “A Nation of THIEVES” EW Barrow. He knew what he was speaking about. He must be rolling in his grave. They say that when thief steal from thief it will make God laugh !


  29. Norst the Invader January 21, 2015 at 7:26 AM #

    “ac: Did you complete secondary school, or were you just drunk when you wrote that nonsense above?”

    Shiite, I agree with you Norst. Perhaps this particular AC was probably smoking some Vincy weed and drinking brandy before writing that incoherent nonsense.
    And if I may borrow a phrase from the consortium’s own Fruendel, “what they say has as much value as what you would see in any garbage dump collected by the Sanitation Services Authority.”

    Some people on BU are trying to “move the goal post” by stating that people do not have any “substance of proof as to at whether the monies were paid as of to date” and “guidelines of client attorney privilege”, all in an effort to prove they are versed in jurisprudence [evidently, which they are not] and defend Carrington’s position.

    However, despite all the incoherent ramblings, the fact remains that Michael Carrington is just another dishonest lawyer, whose creditability has been shot as a result of with-holding his clients funds, and more so because the client is a wheelchair bound individual.


  30. When a court orders you to pay back someone you owe what does that say about you? If a man has to go to the courts to get what is rightfully his isn’t the other party guilty of Fraud? Why do some of wunna still feel that what the speaker did to Mr Griffith is OK under the law? Have you no SHAME? Has the speaker no SHAME?


  31. Please dont spew that word ‘morality’ so loosely. Isnt committing adultery immoral? Is having a young lady horning your wife and embarrassing her immoral? Is slashing and beating immoral? Why did she bite that young lady, wasnt that immoral? Is homosexuality immoral? How did that huge amount of money end up in his relative’s bank account, isnt that immoral? And I could go on and on. People seems content to pick and chose what is moral, just like people love to pick and chose sin. I believe the Speaker should step down from the speakership, but if he doesnt its no big deal once he comes out and explain himself and goes through with the ruling of the Court.


  32. What is interesting is that Ms. Mottley, in Parliament since 1991, now knows that the Committee does not deliver ! Hence the question is : Why send the Carrington matter there ?


  33. @ William Skinner
    “…..in Parliament since 1991, now knows that the Committee does not deliver ! Hence the question is : Why send the Carrington matter there ?”
    +++++++++++++++++
    Because six is half a dozen and they are ALL the same shiite. They think it is a game to be played by the “political class” and if you were to drill right down, almost every one is about as guilty as the speaker…..so it must be VERY HARD for them to deal with him and still sleep at night….THUS THE COMMITTEE…

    Kevin
    The difference is that a HIGH COURT JUDGE has ruled that the speaker has been less than honest in his dealings. If the bitten complainant had taken the biter to court, or the police had prosecuted and proven the case, then the same would apply there.

    shiite man….
    It seems that NO ONE …no even the PM…has any respect for our high court decisions. He said it was all about a ‘newspaper report’…. oh shiite!!!

    It is going to take a special effort for us to get lower than this…..but we will no doubt find the resolve to do so…..

    Bushie REALLY thought that we could get no lower than the shiite tax, but hey…. these politicians are talented….


  34. I guess if we had Integrity Legislation very few lawyers would run for office.


  35. After reading about the amount of crap P.M. Douglas was allowed to get away with in St. Kitts for the past 2 years, and the nonsense that is going on in Guyana in recent months, I expect the government of Barbados to continue as if nothing happened no matter what is said. It is obvious the plan was to send the matter to the committee of privileges and allow it to die in a manner similar to the Estwick/Marshall gun incident. I’ll be shocked if the plan is unsuccessful.


  36. On Wednesday, November 26, 2014, Spain’s health minister resigned to protect the government because of being summons to court, not as a suspect, but to be questioned on allegations of accepting bribes.

    Why can’t Michael Carrington do the same?

    When it comes to anyone other than their own, this administration is quick to unceremoniously remove them from office. The former managers of the Urban and Rural Development Commission, National Housing Corporation, National Association on Substance Abuse and Caves of Barbados Limited comes to mind.

    Also remember the following?:

    “In a letter dated June 17, 2013, and signed by the Chairman of the Police Service Commission, Mr. Guyson Mayers, it stated in part, “I write to inform you that His Excellency, Sir Elliot Fitzroy Belgrave, GCMC, KA, Governor General of Barbados, has been advised by the Police Service Commission to exercise the power conferred upon him by section 11 (1) (a) of the Pensions Act, Cap, 25, and requested that you, in the public interest be retired from the office of Commissioner of Police.”

  37. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ Bush Tea January 21, 2015 at 10:01 AM
    “It seems that NO ONE …no even the PM…has any respect for our high court decisions. He said it was all about a ‘newspaper report’…. oh shiite!!!”

    Oh shite, alright!
    So you have total disregard being shown to an uncontested High Court ruling by the chief law enforcement officer in Barbados seeking to blame a newspaper report for the decimation of the morality of Parliament.
    If the Head of government and the Chief Parliamentary Officer refuse to recognize the authority of an Independent Judiciary what would foreign investors think about the chances of having business contracts honoured in Barbados with recourse to the law courts not recognized by the ruling government.

    Then Bajans would wonder why their country is being downgraded ever so often.
    Bajans stop blaming the credit rating agencies and the IMF for the loss of confidence in the country and its fast deteriorating governance structure and institutions.
    Look into the mirror and see what an ugly mess you are allowing to grow and fester right in your own living room.


  38. If one is so inclined or persuaded be that of political affiliation /personnal grievances to quarrel or wrestle with the intents of the Barbados Constitution regarding moral issues. One should be reminded that cemented and engrained is a Moral Code which is designed to protect each and every individual .An action which gives a right to a fair jurispurdence dictating Innocence until Proven guilty.
    The case (as is) in is presented stage as per judges order did not present a guilt of Theft as accountabilty to the defendant
    Until such a charge be brought forward by those opppsing the defendant actions
    The grounds launched on morality is subjected to personal aggrandising with an overeaching attempt to dismantle the Constitution for personal and political gain

    Have a nice day


  39. I repeat. Adult Suffrage assumes all things being equal the result should be the will of the people.The mess in which we find ourselves,as well as the people of Guyana and St Kitts/Nevis suggest we need to amend that Act and replace it with another which excludes the lumpen proletariat.Only those with Personal and Real Property should determine the outcome of our Parliament,along with some key laws to ensure constant compliance to proper governing principles…..checks and balances.


  40. subject for correction in ac,s above comment”case(as is) in it,s present stage


  41. Wonder what BBC.CNN, Fox will have to say about this story….


  42. Nothing is PRIVATE when the court gives a RULING regardless if it is a simpleton like gearbox or a public figure like Mr or Mrs somebody. In 2012 in Australia. House of Representatives Speaker Peter Slipper stepped aside and was temporarily replaced by his deputy Anna Burke, a Labor Party government lawmaker, while police investigate allegations he misused taxi payment vouchers. The speaker was under two investigations, sexual misconduct and fraud. The sexual misconduct was deemed as a civil matter whilst the fraud was deemed as a criminal matter. Remember, it was only an allegation and he did the right thing and stepped down during the inquiry, however, in this Barbadian case, the high court of the land gave a ruling We must bear in mind that Prime Minister Julia Gillard only had a 1 seat majority. How de hell a ruling was given unless something illegally happened and we are getting all sort baseless support for an illegal act.


    1. Does anyone know how many code of ethics violations (complaints) have been brought before the BA, and the their results.
    2. What would you (BU bloggers) have down if this was your money?

  43. Even though the sexual allegation turn out to be false and the speaker had already removed himself from the chair temporarily and allowed the investigation to continue based on integrity and transparency.


  44. Bush Tea January 21, 2015 at 10:01 AM #…They think it is a game to be played by the “political class” and if you were to drill right down, almost every one is about as guilty as the speaker…..Kevin, The difference is that a HIGH COURT JUDGE has ruled that the speaker has been less than honest in his dealings. —-

    Bushie, and is that not our problem.

    The absolute outrage re the Carrington matter is truly outstanding but the outrage or action suggested should not be predicated on the legal ruling. If the basic evidence was made public before the court ruling Mr. Carrington in the court of public opinion would still be the unscrupulous, fraudulent attorney who attempted to convert his client’s monies to his benefit.

    How many times have our political and corporate elite been able to slide because matters were handled before they got to the courts?

    Would this be any less troubling if he had repaid his client just before the matter landed on the court docket after years of wrangling? I think not.

    All the things that Kevin mentioned speak to the same level of immoral, dishonest behaviour of the type Carrington is accused. We can go back to the Mark Spitz affair, Tom Adams alleged women beating and so much more that speaks to your projected concept of the political class’ swagger that they are above the law.

    I am very hopeful that ‘within all boundaries of the law’ future peccadilloes, trysts, legal fraud and other assorted immoral acts from both sides of the aisle can be ventilated thoroughly on the BU pages so that we can distinguish a 6 from a 9 among our elected officials.

    Modern times and technology allows us to ‘legally’ skewer all vipers in the court of public opinion particularly those who enjoy biting viciously.

    The game is on, as you suggest. Let BU be a chief selector of gravitas.


  45. Whaloss David…..man that new thread LAWYERS IN THE NEWS hott as SHOITE….man I hear it got some big wit sweating and palpatating as they ent got D people money..and they scared stiff when D client gine find enuff money to present D case in Court…Well Done Blogmaster…again….Only on Social Media !!!!!!


  46. @DeeWord

    Let us agree we should be expressing outrage at everything immoral. Are you saying we should not express outrage at this Carrington matter?


  47. Tell Me Why
    Of course any sensible rational Bajan,wherever he/she is would agree with you.Folk like Sleepy,AC,Freundel and the Carrington fella would not agree only because it’s not in their interest to do so.In other words they are being hypocritical.Students of law will eventually have this judgement to refer to in arguing a case,so it is a public matter and reflects badly on the judgement of Carrington,Stuart and Sleepy.

  48. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ old onion bags January 21, 2015 at 11:27 AM #

    “Whaloss David…..man that new thread LAWYERS IN THE NEWS hott as SHOITE….man I hear it got some big wit sweating and palpatating as they ent got D people money..and they scared stiff when D client gine find enuff money to present D case in Court…Well Done Blogmaster…again….Only on Social Media !!!!!!..”

    You should ask David (BU) why he has omitted or not highlighted David Bryan (the son of the man from the Advocate).

The blogmaster invites you to join and add value to the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading