← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

Submitted by Heather Cole
Independence, 1966
Independence, 1966

We all know the story of what happened on November 30th 1966 in Barbados. The island became independent. The Union Jack, the flag of Great Britain was lowered and a Barbadian flag was raised as a symbol of national independence. However, some of the relics of colonialism were not folded up and tucked away like the British flag.

The Bible says that a man must leave an inheritance for his children’s children. Therefore whatever we store up in wealth is to be left for our grandchildren who are our second generation. The vast majority of Barbadians do not have enough for themselves to live comfortably on, far less have savings to set aside for their grandchildren. A generational inheritance is a blessing that allows young men and women to start their early adult life with less difficulty than their grandfathers. This inheritance could be used to pay for university tuition, build a house or even start a business. We have a generational inheritance problem in Barbados.

There was no inheritance to be left during slavery. At Emancipation, the British government compensated the planters for their loss. Nothing was given to the former slaves to start a new life. The British Government did not put any mechanisms in place for the economic, social and political development of the ex-slaves and they became second class citizens in their own country. However, a very small percentage of the black population, mainly the early entrepreneurs like the fishermen and blacksmiths were able to buy land which they were able to pass down to their children.

The harsh social and economic reality of the early 1900’s stalled the process of generational inheritance. The Moyne Commission recommended reforms to alleviate poverty after the Riots but did not address the lack of wealth or changes in government. It only pacified the people by recommending that they be allowed to vote. The Planter/Upper Class still owned the means of production and maintained a tight control over the legislature. This meant that the masses had no power to solve their economic, social or political problems.

It took an entire generation to witness change after the reforms that were recommended by the Moyne Commission. It came as Independence in most territories. What was meant to be freedom from outside control, freedom to make political decisions that were beneficial to the people, freedom to respond to the needs of the people, freedom to allow the people to acquire wealth, now appears to have been an illusion. All of the people should have benefitted economically from independence. The poor have not benefitted; indeed only a select few in Barbados have. One of its main goals should have been the creation of generational wealth for the masses.

The poor have not benefited politically from independence either. The Upper class still maintains control of the government. They now finance political campaigns and some of their funds are used to buy votes. Lack of governmental reform as a recommendation of the Moyne Commission has led to the creation of a self-servient Political Class in Barbados whose intent is to get rich serving the Upper Class while they pacifying the masses

Even Errol Walton Barrow, the father of Independence, great as he was has perhaps done to us the greatest disservice in the modern history of Barbados. Perhaps he thought that the conditions that led up to the riots of 1930’s era would never occur again. However hind sight is not foresight. He has lived and died not knowing of his greatest misgiving. It is that the Constitution of Barbados does not contain a single clause that allows for the empowerment of the masses if they were ever faced with the social, economic and political turmoil again that existed in the 1930’s. There is nothing in the Constitution that allows redress for ills when they are created by those that govern the people.

No thought was given to the meaning of the 1930’s riots that occurred only one generation earlier. There is no grandfather clause in the Constitution to protect the people. His independence did not create a government for the people or by the people; it was government of the people. It was as though our owners changed from the planter class to the political class. Even the role of the Governor General does not serve a meaningful purpose. That role should be one of a mediator between the ruling government and the people. At present the Governor can only take the side of the ruling government and is absolutely no help to the people. Had it been contained in the Constitution that the people can appeal to the Governor General with good cause that the government be removed, that position would be relevant today. The Constitution needs to be re written.

The tenure of this present government has exposed all that is wrong in Barbados. Political corruption, poor governance, lack of confidence in the political system, lack of justice, a floundering economy, continuous down-grades by international rating agencies, high inflation, high unemployment, , the escalating activity of trade unions fighting to preserve the rights of a dwindling labour force, rising crime levels, an increase in poverty, sub-standard levels of health care, an education system now in turmoil both at the tertiary and secondary levels and the inability of the masses to acquire wealth.

Realistically all the evidence that is before us supports the point of view that the Constitution created at Independence is flawed with more rights to the government than the people. The entire country is at risk of systemic failure which can lead to a total collapse because the ruling party has failed to meet its obligations socially, politically and economically and the people can do nothing about it except wait until their term is up or engage in protest action. There is no power of the people to recall.

The country needs change, revolutionary change. Almost two generations after Independence there is no generational wealth for the vast majority of Barbadians to pass down. Yet the present government is bent on securing generational wealth only for their children’s children. Why else would they be seeking to restore a 10% salary increase at this time when they have already fattened their pockets and the treasury is bare?

In the final analysis the two biggest failures of independence are staring us right in our face. It has not created wealth for the masses; if it did no man or woman in Barbados would be inclined to sell their vote. It did not empower the people to have a voice in the decisions that affect this country. We no longer need masters, or to be allowed to speak with a vote once every five years. We can think for ourselves. The Internet has given us a collective voice to partner with government to seek solutions for Barbados. We as a people must come together to rewrite the wrongs and correct the errors and create a new Constitution that is of the people, by the people and for the people. Seventy Nine years after the 1937 Riots and fifty years after Independence we are challenged with the same problems. How can we be celebrating 50 years of failure? Since we now have the ability, it is high time we resolve the problems and not pass them on to the next generation; leaving them to wonder why this present generation did nothing to prevent the country’s demise.


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

233 responses to “Independence: A Blessing or a Curse?”


  1. “The basic definition of an assault is if a person intentionally uses force on another person without their consent.”

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/justin-trudeau-mps-elbow-assault-1.3590357

  2. Well Well & Consequences Avatar
    Well Well & Consequences

    Lol…Thst was self defense, those NDP dudes were bulling the little dude and Trudeau stepped in, thst whinny female wss in the way when Justin stepped back, she should stay home and cook if she does not want to be accidentally jostled.

    This should make Alvin’s night, he cant even stop it.

    “A psychiatrist gives the nod to medical marijuana as research shows more public support for legalisation. – See more at: http://www.nationnews.com/#sthash.180nz7gQ.dpuf

  3. Well Well & Consequences Avatar
    Well Well & Consequences

    Oops….those NDP dudes were BULLYING..the little dude.


  4. @Donna and Well Well, David too.

    I am not the type of person who is quick to condemn without careful consideration of all the facts. The portion of the picture (video) I saw, is what was shown on CBC, and I did not hear the verbal abuse. I also happen to have worked with old people. As a young man, leaving Barbados and going to the U.S to study, I worked during the summers as a nurses assistant at St. Barnabas Hospital for Chronic Diseases; my aunt worked there as a NUrse’s Assistant. Well Well, you should know about, it it is located in the Bronx. And the first place they put me to work was in the ward for the indigent and those who were basically helpless; a boy with cerebral palsy, an old woman with dementia (all white people) people with Parkinson’s, persons with Colostomies, etc. I was taught how to care for them,So I can empathize with their conditions. I can also empathize with the people who have to take care of them. Training is an important part of taking care of them. Old people require a special kind of understanding to deal with them, and specialized training is required. How many people in this country take their old folk to the QEH, and leave them in the emergency department, forcing the government to look after them? How many children take their own parents to the hospital, leave them, and don’t even come and look for them?How many people take their relatives to the Geriatric hospitals and don’t come and look for them or bring things for them. That is because they can’t take care of them at home.
    Which is more cruel and, dare I say, abusive?
    Having the pressures of home life, or the pressures of daily living can have an effect on a persons ability to care for these people. I can understand all sides, and as I said, I am not over-zealous in my rush to condemn, nor take things at face value. I am not excusing the care-giver, and the cook, but they are both relatively young, and I do not see them as being deliberately abusive or cruel. Thoughtless, maybe. Insensitive, definitely. Using poor judgement Yes. But cruel and deliberately abusive, I do not see it. I do not agree with those who come to that conclusion. And your saviour, when the woman accused of adultery was brought to him, for his condemnation, looked to the ground; probably out of pity for the poor, probably trembling, woman; who faced the possibility and probability of being stoned to death, simply made the statement; “he who is without sin, throw the first stone. ” We all know the result. The outcome was his lack of condemnation of the woman, with the admonition to “go and don’t do it again.”
    The women have lost their jobs, if they have children, the pain of losing their jobs and not being able to provide for the children would be a greater punishment than the wrong they are supposed to have done. The shame of the resultant arrest and criminal charges, apart from the expense of hiring a lawyer will be onerous. This episode will be with them for the balance of their lives.The old lady did not suffer any physical after-effects, from what I saw.. They will have their means of attaining work in that field seriously curtailed, if their licenses are taken aWAY. They would be paying maybe a lifelong price for the few moments of insensitivity.
    As I say, I do not rush to condemn. I am more likely to forgive, and not be vindictive.
    If I am wrong in your eyesights, I am sorry, but that is the type of person I am. I have seen and experienced too much suffering in my many years on this earth. And I have worked in hospitals and health care institutions for over fifty years.
    More of us should be more forgiving. Remember Solomon, and the two women claiming the same child?


  5. Alvin,

    You really have no idea about the Bible. When we are told not to judge it does not mean we do not judge an action as being wrong or demand justice if the wrongdoing creates a victim. However the justice must be fair both to the victim and the wrongdoer. The punishment must fit the wrongdoing. Therefore we must not condemn a women to DEATH for getting a little sex on the side whilst we do even worse.

    When we are told not to judge it does not mean a free pass for every action. It means we should not write off an individual permanently as beyond redemption. We are reminded that we too have fallen short of the mark and are not written off by God. But that does not mean we should not suffer the earthly consequences of our actions. Remember God is also the God of justice.

    Sooo….. we may judge an action as being wrong but we may not usurp God’s position and judge the wrongdoer to be beyond God’s reach.

    So Alvin, those two young ladies whom I know personally along with their entire families, these two young ladies whom I KNOW have been taught right from wrong, those two young ladies whom I KNOW have NO MORE PRESSURES OF LIFE than the rest of us will suffer the consequences of their actions and I will pray that they go and sin no more in that particular way.

    No stone throwing here. Just a few hard knocks befitting the “crime.”

  6. Well Well & Consequences Avatar
    Well Well & Consequences

    Alvin…ya know ya full of shit right, ya only saying that cause as usual ya pimping, but I am one who dont believe in none of that shit you spout, you can end up in physical shackles all by yourself and keep your shackled mind.

    It’s a good thing the Earth purges herself of destructive spirits and forces, she learned her lesson centuries ago.


  7. Alvin is even worse than AC.
    He seems to think that being called a name similar to a great 20th century philosopher (one of Dompey’s heroes) somehow makes sense of his warped perspectives.

    Unfortunately, his ‘Kant’ begins with A ‘C’……


  8. @Donna,
    You will note that I said: I am not excusing the care-giver, and the cook, but they are both relatively young, and I do not see them as being deliberately abusive or cruel. Thoughtless, maybe. Insensitive, definitely. Using poor judgement Yes. But cruel and deliberately abusive, I do not see it.
    As you say:We are reminded that we too have fallen short of the mark and are not written off by God.
    I say I am not condemnatory and want more than a pound of flesh; as some people want. I am more sympathetic. Bushy concludes that I have a “warped perspective.” so be it, but I am also a human being and try to live life, where understanding is my guiding principle. If that is warped, big deal. I am too old to change. If I am supposed to be vindictive? Never! If I am supposed to seek vengeance? No way. I am a firm believer in retribution being taken by th power of the FIELD, so there is no need for ME to try to exact retribution from anyone.
    Barbados today is a place, peopled by too many who have gotten away from the precept that we are our neighbours’ keeper. We are too selfish and uncaring. …Oh heck, there I go ,preaching again. Sorry about that. I gone.

  9. Well Well & Consequences Avatar
    Well Well & Consequences

    Alvin…you do realize that selfish and uncaring falls under the category of your political masters attempting to raise their own salaries through stealth…. while the masses suffer dont you….of course now you will want everyone to be forgiving, which makes it then easier for the politicians to come up with another nasty slick trick against the electorate….for self-enrichment

    Why did you not give your selfish and uncaring speech to the young lady seen beating the elderly, dementia suffering female, or Michael Carrington for stealing from a wheelchair bound elderly client.

    You are the first to talk about consequences for the opposition or those whom you oppose because of political pimping rivalry.

    In that regard…you may want to google the definition of hypocrite.


  10. Alvin,

    I never said that WE are to be vindictive. I said one must suffer the consequences of one’s actions. The authorities should take care of that. We the people should encourage the authorities to administer justice. If there are no consequences what’s to stop the average person from doing as he pleases. Never mind that crap about punishment not being a deterrent. Fear of punishment prevents the average man from doing as he likes.

    Well Well,

    It seems Alvin has been reading the Bible so he should have no problem in defining a hypocrite.


  11. @Balance thank you for your sincere comments.


  12. @ Well Well, re your post on May 17 at 5:28 am, We cannot rewrite some of the history of Barbados but we now have the ability to advocate for change and I firmly believe that it will become a reality. It should not be easy for a lawyer to steal land in Barbados but it has happened. We need a title company as well as a specific section of the Court to deal with such issues, Wills that relate to property should have a specific time frame for probate and this should not drag on for years.


  13. @ David, I will get to the Constitution. 2 more things do.


  14. @ Jeff

    Jeff Cumberbatch May 17, 2016 at 6:17 AM #

    “He has lived and died not knowing of his greatest misgiving. It is that the Constitution of Barbados does not contain a single clause that allows for the empowerment of the masses if they were ever faced with the social, economic and political turmoil again that existed in the 1930’s. There is nothing in the Constitution that allows redress for ills when they are created by those that govern the people”.

    How about freedom of expression? Freedom of association? The right to seek redress for infringement in the Courts?

    Have you ever read the Barbados Constitution or any Constitution, Ms Cole?

    This sentence suggests not!

    “There is no grandfather clause in the Constitution to protect the people”.

    Now where would I find one of these clauses? The Constitution is not a grab bag of wishes or a lucky dip!

    As David says @5:59am, these matters need to be tested.

    You should ask the poster Violet Beckles if they can even get a lawyer in Barbados to represent them, far less get into Court to get that matter regarding inherited land resolved. Redress cannot be sought in the Court if you are unable to get your matter inside its doors. I have read the Constitution and there are no grandfather clauses.


  15. @ Are We there yet, Thank you, you inspire me to continue,.. I am striving to make a difference in the lives of fellow Barbadians. I want to inspire others to do the same and take a stand for what is right. We must be the example and building blocks for the next generation. It is the only way to ensure that Barbados will be left in good hands. Many of us are taking what is happening on the island that too lightly.


  16. Well Well,
    Why do you persist in telling untruths? The issue is not one of INCREASING wages, it is a matter of restoring that which was reduced, back to the original amount. I would follow Donnas advice. The Biblical definition is illustrated by Jesus’s comparison between the two men praying, the Pharasee and the Samaritan. I leave it up to you to determine which was the hypocrite.
    Nothing that has to be approved by Parliament, can be done by stealth. Everything in the house and senate are broadcast on the radio and all the members in the House, government and opposition have the opportunity to debate it. Stealth what? You are just being silly and follow pattern. Because Mottley say so, it is so. Bull.


  17. @ Bernard Codrington. May 17, 2016 at 9:56 AM #

    “As usual a well written essay which benefited from a good colonial education. I think Heather has made these same points several times before. I thought I had made a mistake and read a previous intervention. A constitution, even when written ,is a living dynamic contrivance subject to change as the nation and the society evolves. Nothing is cast in stone. So Mr Barrow did not make a mistake .He did what was satisficing to the Nation as a whole in 1966. It is for the general Citizenry to repair and revise what accords with contemporary wisdom and scientific information. The latter changes with each generation. Some times changes occur daily . Such is the nature of life. So having identified the problems . Submit them to public debate and examine whether they make sense to the majority of us.”

    Independence was a mere 50 years ago and we have not forgotten it. 27 years separated the 1937 Riots and Independence. That is a relatively short space of time to have been forgotten without a reference in the Constitution. That was a traumatic phase in our history, the trade union movement was born and so too were the political parties. In my opinion therefore there is no excuse for not inserting a clause for the protection of the people against their rulers.

    Based on the Nuclear Bombs that were dropped on Japan, the Japanese have legislated that they will never wage war again. That is their grandfather clause to protect the people.

    How does one submit problems to the government for public debate? I have written to the PM and several Ministers on several occasions regarding the Cahill Scam and go no response.


  18. @ Mrs Cole

    I will try to answer your query about submitting problems to the government, particularly this government, for debate by commenting on something else you spoke about regarding japan and its legislating against war.

    “YOKOHAMA (Reuters) – Japan’s Maritime Self Defense Force on Wednesday took delivery of the biggest Japanese warship since World War Two, the Izumo, a helicopter carrier as big as the Imperial Navy aircraft carriers that battled the United States in the Pacific.

    The Izumo with a crew of 470 sailors is a highly visible example of how Japan is expanding the capability of its military to operate overseas and enters service as Prime Minister Shinzo Abe seeks lawmaker approval to loosen the restraints of Japan’s pacifist post-war constitution.”

    Wise countries reassess their ongoing positions (and constitutions) as would anyone understanding that we are living in changing times.

    As pacifist as Japan is, if russia or North Korea or any foreign power were to attack its shores, you better had believe that all that legislation is going to be suspended in a hurry.

    That is what patriotism is, and what national security of patriotic people demands.

    Fumble and his band of scvnts are not patriots they are parasites so the only way that We the People can and will be able to deal with those effers will be at the ballot box when we will either elect your people Mia, or a set of patriots.

    Until then sit back and enjoy the rough ride to the 50th Year Celebrations, we hshall be rid of them soon and another set of bembers shall take over and reign

  19. Well Well & Consequences Avatar
    Well Well & Consequences

    Heather…that’s because most in parliament, lawyers mind you, are not familiar with grandfather clauses, or there would be a few. The corporate world uses them in insurance trusts, particularly when the insurance companies became demutualized in the 90s…in US.

    The only words too many lawyers seem to know in Barbados are, it cant happen and you cant do it…they are frightening and would definitely not make it in a world where negativity is avoided.

    The young folk have the energy to fight off the negative and introduce the positive so the required amendments, clauses and ratifications can be made to the constitution. ., despite the idiocy of those who are currently useless with regard to having the intellect required to actually make the changes.

    Heather…ya did get an indirect response from the government re Cahill scam…it blew up in the government minister’s faces…pure scandal…lol

    I am still waiting for Jeff to tell me how introducing grandfather clauses can be done in Barbados…I have seen many of those clauses applied over the years.

    You have old tired men like Alvin…instead of trying to give the young the tools they need to make positive change going forward, are instead trying to leave a yardfowl legacy where the people have to follow politicians who only think of self, if they do not become yardfowls, the politicians refuse to do their jobs adequately to benefit the whole population, despite being paid a salary by the people….and he actually thinks he is doing something….that is what the young must fight against on the island, mindless stupidity and ignorance of old yardfowls…and politicians who are self-serving, expose them each and everytime.

    Alvin…you will never find me getting into a war of yardfowl or political pimp words with you, it’s beneath me, since I am neither..you can wallow in yardfowlhood and pimphood all by yourself…until the next exposure, which am sure is just around the corner…save your energy for the next DLP scandal.


  20. We are a peaceful (euphemism for docile) people

    Brass bowls are like this, so we “agitate” and write nice essays that our colonial masters would be proud of.

    Experts that we are, versed in the Magna Carta, and 100 Years Wars, totally devoid of any sense or knowledge of our own history, unless the dumbed down, politically correct version. is told by Karl Watson and Professor Henry Fraser

    One thing I do know of human nature is that the constant imagery of posters to counter the constant bombarding by these ministers on CBC, will bring people to the realisation that they are empty vessels.

    So that when the bell rings, there will be no need to submit problems to this “uncaring” inept government for the next 25 years.

    http://imgur.com/8uxWzjH

  21. Jeff Cumberbatch Avatar
    Jeff Cumberbatch

    And someone who has had some connection with law for over 40 years now, I understand the concept of a grandfather clause to allow for certain situations where there may be a need to use a provision of the law in a circumstance where it would not ordinarily apply, The new situation is “grandfathered” in.

    For my own enlightenment, will someone please indicate how and in what circumstances this would be applied in the context of a Constitution? I promise that I will not ask again.

  22. Jeff Cumberbatch Avatar
    Jeff Cumberbatch

    Ms Cole, what you refer to as a grandfather clause in Japan @65:09 pm is not one. It is a simple legislative provision. Unless this is a modern day Humpty Dumpty scenario where a word means only what you intend it to mean…no more…no less!

  23. Jeff Cumberbatch Avatar
    Jeff Cumberbatch

    *5:09pm

  24. de pedantic Dribbler Avatar
    de pedantic Dribbler

    Oh lawd, @Jeff, in advance I beg your pardon for this plagiarism. But as I read through the comments I started to formulate a response and then I saw your comment and was like…adai…this man is as confused as I am. So, do excuse me for using your words.

    As someone who has had some connection with the English language for over 40 years now – and NONE with the law- , I comprehend the English meaning of a grandfather clause as to allow for certain situations to be post-dated into the law by an AMENDMENT in circumstances were TWO classes of rights will become extant: one for the ‘grandparents’ and another for those non-‘grandparents’ who are governed by the existing provisions of the law. The new situation has been “grandfathered” in.

    So for example, when many US states wanted to enfranchise poor, illiterate Whites to vote they AMENDED their laws to say that ‘whereby persons who had been voters, or descendants of those who had been voters’ at a certain date ‘could be registered notwithstanding their inability to meet any literacy requirements’.

    Sooooo all the people dem who at that time COULD not vote were in one stroke of the pen by their legislators ‘grandfathered’ into the family; except that big-foot move was done purposefully and deliberately to disenfranchise an entire other class of people who similarly illiterate were however also immediately continued to be ‘grandfathered’ out of a right to vote.

    So I also want to understand exactly what dis is about!!!

    These folks making absolutely no sense to me either….English-wise that is.

  25. Well Well & Consequences Avatar
    Well Well & Consequences

    Heather…here is a very recent example of clauses being added or removed from a constitution to undo previous unconstitutional laws and practices.

    ” An Ipsos Fairfax poll released on Monday showed 85% of Australians were in favour of a clause being added to the constitution to recognise Australia’s first people, up from 77% in 2013.

    Grey line
    What’s at stake:
    The Joint Select Committee on Constitutional Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples has recommended these changes to the constitution:

    Recognising that the continent and its islands now known as Australia were first occupied by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples

    Acknowledging the continuing relationship of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples with their traditional lands and waters

    Respecting the continuing cultures, languages and heritage of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples

    Repealing the two so-called “race provisions”:
    section 25 that recognises that the states can disqualify people on the basis of their race from voting
    section 51(26) that allows laws to be made based upon a person’s race.

  26. Well Well & Consequences Avatar
    Well Well & Consequences

    Pedantic…those Jim Crow laws grandfathered in 1898 were repealed and deemed unconstitutional with the advent of the 15th amendment…grandfather clauses are still very useful to those who have the intelligence to use them and if used wisely…re the constitution.

    They are also very useful for raising or lowering age of majority, legal age of drinking, city ordnances, in businesses etc, etc….but only if you understand their use..

  27. Well Well & Consequences Avatar
    Well Well & Consequences

    Modern day uses of grandfather clauses:

    “A grandfather clause allows the current status of something pre-existing to remain unchanged, despite a change in policy which applies in the future.

    For example, the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution specified term limits for future presidents, but did not apply to the president (Truman) in office when Congress passed it. In another example, zoning regulations may disallow property to be used for certain purposes, but contain a grandfather clause allowing properties with such uses already in existence to legally continue.

    Whether a pre-existing use will be grandfathered into a new zoning regulation disallowing such uses depends on a variety of factors and political influences, so there is no definitive rule on whether a particular use will be grandfathered into the new regulation.

    In another example, businesses serving the public are required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to make their premises handicap accessible. If you own, operate, lease, or lease to a business that serves the public, then, you are covered by the ADA and have obligations for existing facilities as well as for compliance when a facility is altered or a new facility is constructed.

    Existing facilities are not exempted by “grandfather provisions” that are often used by building code officials.”


  28. As a legal scholar who did not have the benefit of legal raining, but receiving my certification from google, I wish to put a word into play….. amend.

    Thus we will amend the constitution and grandfather in a few situations.

    From hereon all degrees will be preceded by G… GBS, GMS, GPhd, GLLB… G being for google…


  29. *training

  30. Well Well & Consequences Avatar
    Well Well & Consequences

    Let google be your friend….grandfather clauses are periodically used to make amendments to the Canadisn constitution.

    Pedant … vous vivez au Canada et devrait connaître les clauses de grand-père sont utilisés pour réguler les provinces et leurs constituences … il est pas sorcier .

    Representation in the House of Commons: A Long Term Proposal
    David Gussow

    On December 16, 2011 Bill C-20 An Act to amend the Constitution Act, 1867, the Electoral Boundaries Readjustment Act and the Canada Elections Act received Royal Assent (now Chapter 26 of the Statutes of Canada, 2011). It increased the number of seats in the House of Commons from 308 to 338 by giving extra seats to Ontario, British Columbia, Alberta and Quebec. While representation in the House of Commons is now settled for at least a decade the issue of representation by population will arise again as mandated in section 52 of the Constitution Act, 1867 and protected in section 42 of the Constitution Act, 1982. This article makes a number of suggestions for the next time rep by pop is debated in Canada. Among other things it calls for improved provisions for the smaller provinces, a new mechanism for adjusting the Electoral Quotient and future constitutional negotiations to deal with problems that have developed over the years.

    http://www.revparl.ca/35/1/35n1_12e_gussow.pdf


  31. If we had visionary leaders in our parliament, one constitutional change could likely be to the effect that from Dec 1st 2016 (the beginning of our next 50 years as an independent country) only Barbadians and approved aliens as defined in the constitution shall be entitled to own, or purchase land in this country. All others will be required to lease or rent as needed.

    Grandfather Clause:
    Notwithstanding section C (above), all foreign owners of land in Barbados as at November 31, 2016 will be deemed to be ‘approved aliens’ for the purposes of this act.


  32. @ Well Well & consequences,

    Google is friendly but you could have provided this.

    http://www.revparl.ca/35/1/35n1_12e_gussow.pdf

  33. de pedantic Dribbler Avatar
    de pedantic Dribbler

    @The Gazer, I love it. Awesome. You nailed it.

    Well, well. Why did you just commit blog cardinal sin numero uno with that inane cut and paste. It does not make your point any clearer.

    Read Gazer @ 8:52 … “Thus we will amend the constitution and grandfather in a few situations.”

    I do not have Jeff’s legal scholarship either so please excuse me, but you are making absolutely no practical sense.

    A ‘grandfather’ clause is an AMENDMENT. What and how that amendment works then determines how it is categorised/defined.

    In simple terms an amendment which creates two classes based on the same fundamental provisions would be considered a ‘grandfather clause’.

    It is not a ‘grandfather because it goes back to a very old time…that’s an old man, like Pieces or Bushie….oh lawd…ma belly!!!

    What is this repeated palaver about how amendments are made and whether the local lawyers have a capacity to understand them and their use and whether we can grandfather our Constitution????

    You seem to be debating a nonsense, to me.

    Good lawd, this is simple English comprehension.


  34. A well written and sensible law by Bush Tea.
    A step in “making Barbados great again”

  35. Jeff Cumberbatch Avatar
    Jeff Cumberbatch

    What have you “grandfathered” Bush Tea? The position has not been altered from what it was before! Now converting certain former aliens, say those who have been resident for ten or more years into Barbadian citizens would be an example of a grandfather clause. A grandfather clause seeks to make an old situation apply in new cicumstances. Now, what do we want to grandfather in the Barbados Constitution?

  36. de pedantic Dribbler Avatar
    de pedantic Dribbler

    Bushie, you really expect Well well to UNDERSTAND what you wrote???

    In fact deep apologies let me rephrase that…Bushie could you explain what you wrote.

    Is that a proposed amendment which would follow all the rules and regulation for such amendments?

    Are all amendments like that one and are considered grandfather clauses?

    Thanks.

  37. de pedantic Dribbler Avatar
    de pedantic Dribbler

    Ok Jeff dealt with that so forget my queries Bushie!


  38. @ pieceuhderockyeahrightPiece May 17, 2016 at 11:39 AM #

    Do you have a problem with Constitutional changes?


  39. What have you “grandfathered” Bush Tea?
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    The pre-existing situation where non-Barbadians already own property would be regularised under the new arrangement. Such persons could continue to enjoy the privilege, while no such future land sales will be legally possible.
    They could continue as owners, even if they chose not to become citizens, and could only sell in future to Barbadians if they decided to sell.

    The ‘grandfather clause’ provides for the status quo to be regularised under the pending new dispensation.

  40. de pedantic Dribbler Avatar
    de pedantic Dribbler

    @Heather, re”Do you have a problem with Constitutional changes?”…………

    No one does. The question from day one has been: what do you want to change that requires a CONSTITUTIONAL amendment?

    Parliament legislates new laws regularly. That is one of their reasons for being there.

    What new laws will save our existence that need to be reflected at the base level of our country’s customs and practices?

    Bring those for debate rather than debating what an amendments means.

    We are not in a civics class of beginners after all.


  41. @ Mrs. Cole

    I, as you would note in all my pieces, do not have a problem with constitutional changes.

    What i do have a problem with is ingrunt uninformed citizens being asked at some time during the process to vote, should it come to a referendum for example on something that seems, even at this eleventh hour, no pun intended, to have wiser minds than the rabble in Marl Hole of whom I number, at loggerheads. e.g. the grandfather term.

    It would seem to me that the process of sensitization on these issues requies that they be ventilated with more rigour than Hal Gollop or other parties can generate sitting alone and drafting any constitutional changes.

    As good a carpenter as i might be, my passing by your 20×20 wood house and telling you that you have to get a complete overhall of all the boards (in your house) because of the “arthropod phylum that I see have left their chitinous exoskeleton across your verandah” simply is not a suggestion that you will accept jes so.

    This is not an under the bushel type deal. You need to understand what i am doing.

    secondly, with consideration to the foxes that are counting the chickens, i have serious reservations concerning the outcome of such an exercise given some of the persons to whom the tasks are being referred.

    So, to reiterate, I am advanced into the procedural part of the mechanism and would have already voiced my agreement that such dated things may require periodic review, and reassessment, to ensure that they do not discommode more than they assist.


  42. I read you loud and clear Bush Master. There really was no need to repeat.
    Perhaps, it is because I hold a similar belief that your meaning was readily apparent to me.


  43. Thanks @ The Gazer
    Jeff too…
    But like most teachers, he just wants to see how committed Bushie is to the proposition… 🙂
    All other countries where the people have any modicum of self respect and respect for their FUTURE generations, such a law would have been part of the constitution from December 1, 1966.
    But Brass bowls can only be brass bowls…

    The point here, however is about ‘grand-fathering’…. and often, being ‘FAIR’ requires that past brass bowlery be reasonably accommodated …even when clearer vision takes hold…. this is the genesis of a legal grand father clause – although, like most things, it can also be used to continue a wrong – even after the situation has been recognised and supposedly addressed.

    Bushie is at a loss to understand the lotta long talk….


  44. @Bush Tea

    In the example you selected it would make sense to make the change as at a date to effect all non residents/aliens.

    @Jeff

    It must be frustrating to debate a non point.


  45. BU has championed the point many times we need to introduce the teaching of civics in our schools. There is no connection between the Constitution of Barbados and the every day citizen. We have produced a boatload of lawyers yet many issues have gone untested in our courts. The Barbados Bar Association has the wherewithal to bring the system to a grinding halt yet it continues to act in a system where the delivery of justice is compromised on a daily basis. What we need is for the actors in the system to act.


  46. @ David
    Bushie recommended a date of 1 December, 2016. @ 9:40 PM

    “What we need is for the actors in the system to act.”
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Actually, what we need is to get rid of the ‘actors’ and find some REAL, thinking, intelligent, GODLY people to fill these critical positions.

    Do you understand that positions on these professional bodies are rotated to allow otherwise clueless morons the opportunity to enhance their CVs?
    Those effers (thanks piece) are just hanging in there until their time is served..and trying to cause as little ‘boat-rocking’ as possible….

    ‘actors’ is a good description.


  47. @Bushie

    We are saying the same thing. Actors must act, including those who are currently disengaged.

  48. de pedantic Dribbler Avatar
    de pedantic Dribbler

    @ Bush Tea & David; you have moved the debate to more substance. David, actually opened this particular door so I will oblige him and enter.

    If at Nov 31 all foreign owners of land are deemed to be ‘approved aliens’ with rights as a Barbadian then in my view a true grandfather status would allow said foreign owners/approved alien to act as a Barbadian with any land deal going forward, whereas after Nov 31 any other foreigner owner would not have said privileges.

    With the pre Nov 31 grandfathered status foreign owners would be able on a new deal ‘to own, or purchase land’ due to their approved alien status, whereas those after Nov 31st could now only lease.

    So in Bushie’s example it should really be considered basic and standard that the amendment would apply to all those new entrants after the said date and not affect those who had been legally entitled before that.

    Thus in that regard the term grandfather clause though technically correct as generally used seems innocuous based on what is being allowed.

    @David, if we have all of these lawyers several of whom are smart and ‘hungry’ and yet there have been no litmus test cases on constitutional reform doesn’t that tell you a lot!!!

    Why do you perceive that an explosion of civics classes would in the long run provide a greater impetus towards court challenges?

    It was instructive that throughout all these two or three blogs by the constitutional reformers that they have not yet identified exactly what they want to say and change.

    Students do Caribbean works, Chaucer and other ole English texts at school (at least when I was there) which are infinitely more complex than reading and offering comments on our constitution.

    Any decent student who can understand his English lit and comprehension and/or deduce her maths problems is very well placed to dissect and parse a bunch of words on how we want to run our country.

    We make this constitution thing a much bigger deal than it is.


  49. @Dee Word

    Having an understanding of civics from an early age will create the confidence knowing ones rights and hopefully provoke the will to challenge. One cannot think about challenging anything if there is an abundance of ignorance.

  50. Well Well & Consequences Avatar
    Well Well & Consequences

    Hants…I know, I cut out the statistics, it did not copy well…at lesst I know you are on the ball.

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