The Caswell Franklyn Column – Auditor General Got It Wrong

Auditor General, Leigh Trotman

One of my greatest challenges is debunking erroneous, but honestly held, positions of influential and respected persons that have been shared publicly. This week I will concern myself with one such statement that was carried by the Nation.

The November 6, 2017 edition reported, according to the Auditor General’s report for 2016, that the Ministry of the Environment and Drainage had inadvertently overpaid workers and is now short $200,000. The report went on to state that overdrawn salaries were an issue for Government, and that while this could happen from time to time, the large amounts of some overpayments suggested that not enough action was being taken to minimise its occurrence.

While I admit that overpayments of salary may occur, they are not anywhere near the amounts suggested by the Auditor General. To my certain knowledge, the vast amounts of money shown as overdrawn salary in Government accounts results from a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the rules, and possibly even from the enforcement of an unannounced change in Government policy.

In order to understand the problem, it is necessary to go back to the establishment of the National Insurance Scheme (NIS). When that scheme started, provision was made to pay sickness benefits to workers for a year (312 days) (NIS does not pay for Sundays). However, that provision did not apply to appointed Government workers, since they were already entitled to a year’s paid sick leave in accordance with the General Orders for the Public Service. That is why permanent government employees only pay 8.8 % of their salary to NIS while private sector workers pay 10.1%.

On the other hand, temporary government workers are entitled to receive NIS sickness benefits. However, as far as I am aware, it is Government policy to pay temporary officers their full salary and then the officers would pay in the sickness benefits when they are received. I benefitted from that policy when I was a temporary officer in the Civil Service in the 1980s. That arrangement would therefore have become a condition of service for temporary officers. It was never changed or rather no change has ever been announced.

As far as I am aware, most of this so-called overdrawn salary was paid to workers who had sick leave in excess of the 14 days allowed to temporary employees. When these workers go on certified sick leave that exceeds their allotted time, they continued to receive their full salary. Thereafter, sometimes years later, the officer is informed that the Chief Personnel Officer has approved an extension of sick leave without pay. The officer is then required to refund the money that was paid. But in a majority of these cases, the worker did not claim any NIS sickness benefit because they were receiving full pay.

Mind you, there is no provision anywhere in the laws governing the Public Service that allows the Chief Personnel Officer or anyone else to grant an extension of sick leave without pay. General Order 5.24.1 states:

Extensions of leave with full pay may be granted on the ground of ill-health to any officer other than a casual employee for a period not exceeding six calendar months, and when there is reason to believe that the officer will ultimately be fit for further service, for a further period not exceeding six calendar month.

To my certain knowledge, the Personnel Administration Division is now aware that there is no such thing, in the Public Service rules and regulations, as an extension of sick leave without pay but has steadfastly refuse to fix the problem. Doing so would mean that Government would have to refund millions of dollars that have been seized from workers, without lawful cause.

In this case, it is my view that Auditor General is auditing in accordance with the unlawful practice that has crept into the Public Service, rather than according to the law and longstanding Government policy.

49 thoughts on “The Caswell Franklyn Column – Auditor General Got It Wrong

  1. @Caswell

    It boggles the mind we have this ‘inefficiency’ being allowed to continue unchecked by those responsible for compliance in government.

  2. David
    What should boggle your mind is that the AG, like all the rest of us. is not infallible.

    That no amount of checks and balances within Westminster type government can compensate for the active and ongoing participation of the masses, on a day to day basis, with power, to interfere, disrupt, remove, maladministration at all levels.

    • Agreed Pacha, in this case it appears the practice is embedded in this is the way we do things more than it being regarded as a breaking of any rule. This situation can probably be replicated through the service.

  3. Some persons turn up at the work place to get a salary. Many others actually do work for their salaries. Sorting through this mess required some effort. I am sure somewhere on the files a legal opinion was sought and received. Implementing that decision/ advice required courage and professionalism.

  4. This problem is simple. The Government wants to cut expenditure and its minions, who have senior public service jobs, came up with this measure. They are literally stealing from defenceless public workers, who have been relying on the major unions that are unfamiliar with public service rules(That is why I said defenceless)

  5. Once again the inefficiency of the collective BLPDLP regimes are surfacing. What should “boggle” the minds is why we persist in seeing them as the only hope for governing our country.
    Everyday, almost now hourly, we are amazed as the apologists continue to defend the BLPDLP while pretending to criticise it. Every area of good governance has been compromised by the incestuous relationship of Roebuck and George Streets.
    BU should be in the forefront of real change but …………………..

  6. @ William Skinner November 19, 2017 at 12:53 PM
    “Once again the inefficiency of the collective BLPDLP regimes are surfacing. What should “boggle” the minds is why we persist in seeing them as the only hope for governing our country.”

    WS, you need to stop with your nihilistic ‘anti-BLPDLP’ stance and state openly which alternative you are recommending to replace the existing two-party jokers.

    Be honest enough and ‘man-up’ to whom you would like to see holding the reins of government to usher in this dawn of political development.

    Why not back Solutions Barbados with its infused philosophy of the Prosperity Gospel to bring down ISO 9001 heaven to Bajan earth?

    “Any halfway clever devil would decorate the highway to Hell as beautiful as possible.”
    ― Criss Jami, Healology.

    “Better the devil you know than the devil you don’t know”.

  7. Come off it, William Skinner………… this is not a dictatorship where YOU want to FORCE people to support the PARTY of YOUR CHOICE.

    Whether you like it or not, people have a right to defend any party of their choice…………. or “continue to defend the BLPDLP while pretending to criticise it.” Why should it bother you????

    By blaming politicians for every shiite, you seem to be suggesting politicians should “micro manage” every department or statutory corporation under their portfolio.

    To be fair………….even if it were Solutions Barbados, CAP, UPP or Mark Adamson that formed the government…………. how could you blame any political party for administrative inefficiencies that should be dealt with at the departmental level rather than at the political level?

    Such matters should be dealt with by administrative officers, personnel officers and accountants………….. NOT politicians.

    Stop the childish griping.

  8. The questions should be “why so much sick leave in the first place?” and “how many of these ‘sick’ workers are really sick”.

  9. Miller

    Your insistence that Skinner adumbrates how a new political-economy system would look, is unfair.

    Indeed, such an assignment is. and should be, beyond the capabilities of any one man. Which is a good thing lest we again fall back into our need for a savior mentality.

    Notwithstanding, those of us who have long been positing such have cited the cooperative model as a familiar, yet successful, starting point. Which at the same time would represent a radical departure from the accepted norms.

    Until then we are better positioned trying to understands the obvious questions.

  10. @ Artax ,Miller
    I will continue to expose those who
    are propping up the decadent BLPDLP.
    I am supporting any party or independents
    who are seeking to get rid of the BLPDLP
    I have stated this in BU on more than
    one occasion.
    @ Pacha
    What do you really expect from these
    BLPDLP apologists? They are just
    positioning themselves for the next
    BLPDLP feeding. They cannot stand
    anyone who wants to dump the
    BU is now being used as their major
    organ of keeping the status quo in
    Those of us who actually care about
    about Barbados beyond the BLPDLP,
    will continue to call for the banishment
    of the BLPDLP.
    I am not saying that those now seeking
    to replace them will be our saviors. But
    after 63 years of the BLPDLP, Barbados
    is heading for the rocks.
    It will not be saved by those who have
    collectively steered it their.
    The only difference between Mia
    Mottley and Freundel Stuart is how
    we spell their names.
    Dump the BLPDLP. Give our country
    room to breathe.

  11. William Skinner you are a disgruntle exDem trying you hardest to equate the DLP who has been a dismal failure hence your distress ,with the BlP under whom people lived fairly comfortable.Therefore your strategy is to try to stop the return of the BLP with tis rubbish about DLP/BLP same thing gibberish.However it will not work because now is not the time for newbies with no experience in government since running a country is not running a business,as you well know.History shows that Mr Arthur took up Barbados in 1994 in shambles under Mr Sandiford and yhrough inspired policies brought Barbados around.Therefore it shows with proper leadership anything is possible and I believe Ms Mottley possesses that ability.Therefore Mr Skinner you want to vote 3rd parties go ahead the majority I believe going with the BLP much to your annoyance but tht,s life.

  12. In 1961 we had newbies and the first term, at least, was dynamic. We need new ideas and new people. Look what more of the same has done to us.

    • We also had newbies in 1976. People believe that politicians run the country. That is a myth, the Public Service runs the country and whenever politicians jump in with the impression that running the country is their job, we end up in trouble.

      Barrow and Adams had Steve Emptage who kept the politicians in check, while giving the impression that they were in charge.

      Sent from my iPad

    • The issue here Caswell is that we err somewhat when we localize our problems. Our social systems are decaying across the Caribbean, there is no wiggle room given our debt:gdp ratios that are mostly north of 100%. There is something happening and we are grappling to understand why.

    • The problems started when politicians started to take over functions of the Civil Service. In Barbados, ours can be traced to the constitutional amendments of 1974. Politicians stop taking advice and without any technical skills to run their ministries, they have bulldozed their way into administrative functions.

      Sent from my iPad

  13. @ Lorenzo
    I am ex NDP . Thank you. You want us to
    believe that it must be BLPDLP. No
    independent would buy your garbage.
    You and your kind cannot deny that
    after 63 years of the BLPDLP, the country
    is in a mess. There is no philosophical
    difference. Even Owen Arthur ducked out
    when and he was once your political
    Primadonna. Errol Barrow had become
    totally frustrated with his party and was
    about to fire the entire cabinet .
    So if you think you or any of your
    divide and rule Barbados forever , it would
    not happen. You want BU to be another
    Advocate/ Nation defending the decadent
    BLPDLP ?

  14. Caswell Franklyn

    While we readily agree with you that the politicians cannot even go to the bathroom unless the senior civil servants say so

    You have left the impression that there is something sacrosanct about the senior civil servant. We see them as the people who have a high degree of effective control without a corresponding responsibility to the people, the public.

    In all fairness to the politicians, something is very wrong with such a system.

    The very nature of bureaucratic management systems present a lot of problems of their own, These include an inability to innovate. And there are many more problems with bureaucratic management systems.

    In this regard the Barbadian civil service is not much different than it was 100 years ago.

    The best thinking suggests some combination of systems is preferred

    Your civil service has been a monumental failure as well. Those hidden failures have been so great that it would be fair to conclude that there is no essential difference between the civil service elites and the political elites.

    The senior civil servants are the ones who help to corrupt the political system by accepting certain payments or being the conduits thus from the corporate elites.

    • Pacha

      You have a very wrong and distorted view of the Public Service, which shows that you are not familiar with the service from close up.

      Those high degrees of which you speak are usually those who don’t have a clue but are promoted based on academic qualifications rather than on ability to do the job.

      In my experience, there were persons like L.V. Harcourt Lewis and Fitzgerald Parris who were among the most effective Civil Service managers but did not have those high degree of which you speak.

      Since Barrow took it upon himself to change the Constitution to allow the Prime Minister to influence the appointment of senior managers in the Service, everything was on a slow boat to hell.

      Sent from my iPad

  15. William Skinner what do mean /Mr Arthur ducked or do you mean he was voted out because of David Thompson,s pie in the sky promisesand half truths which surprisingly sensible Bajans fell for.I was never convinced by those proposals and was not a fan of Mr Thompson,and from that first budget and viola here we are today.Even Mr Sandiford wants to know how we got back here and the answer is obvious,uninspired leadership and a policy of try a thing here and try a thing there by mostly political newbies and you are suggesting to place Barbados in the hands of polictical neophtyes again.I know in 1976 we had newbies but none of these new partiy leaders ain,t no Tom Adams or Errol barrow not by a long shot so as I said you want to vote for third parties be my guest but do not come trying to influence sensible people with your opinion because I ain,t buying it

  16. Caswell

    We have known the late great civil servant Harry Lewis personally. Lewis was a wildly character, respected by both sides.

    He would never be caught up in foolishness but might ask others to.

    This writer worked in, then with, the civil service for a number years

    And we also concede that the country has produced some really good public servants. Humphrey Walcott and Tosh Gittens are another two. But this does not mean that the blame for the political failures should not be shared.

    How could you brag about civil service control but refuse to share blame.

    • Pacha

      My point is that the Public Service is no longer in control and therefore should not take the blame. It has reached such a lowe that politicians now decide which messenger drives a particular vehicle.

      Sent from my iPad

  17. @ Lorenzo
    Didn’t Arthur”ducked” out of the BLP and
    said it had “ lost its soul “ Did he not say
    that Mia Mottley was unfit to be Prime
    Minister? This is most recent history. Is
    your memory that short?
    So I stand by my position. Arthur ducked
    and Barrow was completely frustrated
    with the DLP Cabinet.
    Now, you can continue on your merry way
    trying to keep the old rusty gass gauzzling
    BLPDLP juggernaut on the road.
    I have chosen to retire them to the old
    Political graveyard where I have known
    they belong to since 1978.
    You and your blind lot cannot move me
    from this position.
    Dump the bankrupt, corrupt BLPDLP. Give
    Barbados room to breathe.

  18. William Skinner is 100% correct about the ongoing shiitiness of the BLP/DLP.

    Unfortunately, the problem is that the NDP was also a waste of time, The PDP were a bunch of mock sticks, SB is lost in space, CUP got leaks and CAP is jobby…. indeed, (as Bushie has tried to explain) there are NO brass bowl options….

    The FUNDAMENTAL problem lies in our flawed national character – which has been destroyed by brass bowlery. The ONLY solution is a RENEWED national CHARACTER built on justice and righteousness …. and this is about as likely as us seeing Vincent leading a Black Power movement.

    Wunna could talk shiite till the fat lady sings… it is only going to get worse.

  19. Alright Caswell

    We are willing to cede to your more current knowledge

    But you really think we have civil servants like the great men you mentioned, still? That is hard to believe.

    BTW we also knew Fitzgerald Parris, through one of sons, quite well. He was at Services Commission Dept, we seem to recall. He lived in the area would take us to school 2 or 3 times a week.

  20. @ William Skinner

    What does “exposing those who are propping up the decadent BLPDLP” prove?

    Does it prove that people are STUPID or are COMMITTING a CRIMINAL OFFENCE because they choose to EXERCISE their constitutional, democratic and human RIGHTS to SUPPORT the political party of their choice………

    …………… because YOU hate the BLP & DLP, or because you’re diametrically opposed to those individuals that support both political parties?

    So, in every instance an individual expects to benefit from the “fatted calf” because he/she supports a political party?

    Mr. Skinner…… that is YOUR opinion, which you CANNOT force it down the throats of others.

    Sir, you are being extremely childish………. your endorsement of the various “third parties” could likewise be interpreted as you riding on the “wings of change in the political landscape” in anticipation of largess as reward for your support.

  21. Bush Tea November 19, 2017 at 7:18 PM #

    “William Skinner is 100% correct about the ongoing shiitiness of the BLP/DLP. Unfortunately, the problem is that the NDP was also a waste of time, The PDP were a bunch of mock sticks, SB is lost in space, CUP got leaks and CAP is jobby…. indeed, (as Bushie has tried to explain) there are NO brass bowl options….”


    I know yuh gine cuss me, but you are absolutely correct!

  22. @ Caswell, Pacha
    I did have some professional exposure to
    some of the public service stalwarts you both
    mentioned. Many of them did support
    one of the major parties but somehow
    they maintained some professional
    independence. For example: Tom Adams
    made Harvourt Lewis Governor of the
    Barbados National Bank. The entire
    culture of the public service seems to have
    changed and it is difficult to place the
    blame for our current predicament
    exclusively on the political directorate
    or the public service.
    It is of some interest to note that most
    Of the top and rising stars are now graduates
    of the UWI. Perhaps they see the party
    affiliation as more important than the
    traditional role of the public secant
    which mayb e considered more of a
    colonialist mentality.
    So we have a massive cultural shift which
    now has public servants unions being
    determined to change governments
    and two bankrupt parties completely
    incapable of revolutionizing the country.
    Unless there is a seismic shift , the country
    will get progressively worse.
    Unfortunately as long as the main purveyors
    of this culture, the decadent BLPDLP
    remain “ in power” crapsud smoke we pipe.

    • Pacha

      The men I mentioned have no equal in today’s public service. I would be bold enough to say that none of the current permanent secretaries or heads of department can come close to filling their shoes.


      If you want to identify the person who was responsible for the destruction of the Public Service, look no further than the Rt. Excellent Errol Barrow.

      Do you recall him calling the Civil Service an army of occupation. To date, most people don’t know what he meant. An army of occupation does not mean that there are a lot of people working.

      Mr. Barrow was a soldier and he knew that an army of occupation is an army that conquered a country and then occupy and control that country. When he called the Civil Service an army of occupation, he meant that the Civil Service was large and in charge in much the same way as an army that had defeated a country and is now ruling that defeated country.

      He set about to break that control and the current Public Service is the shambles that Barrow bequeathed to the country.

      Sent from my iPad

  23. @ Artax
    Bushie reserves the right to cuss everybody 🙂 … (well except David (BU) for obvious reasons)… so don’t dig nothing as the Trinis would say…

    Why do YOU pick on Skinner because he states a CLEAR FACT that the BLP/DLP has run this country into a deep pit of dog shit?
    Why must his OBVIOUS statement of FACT mean an endorsement of a third party ‘because he is anti-BLP’?

    All HE is saying is that ALL those who has the opportunity so far …did shiite….
    All Bushie is saying is that all who had the chance did shiite, AND those who did NOT get the chance …ARE shiite….. so we are in potta….

    @ Caswell
    It is more complicated than that…
    Barrow had a good point, in that the then Civil Service was MUCH too steeped in the COLONIAL philosophy of doing things, for an emerging Barbados….
    Change was needed….

    Unfortunately, we threw out the baby with the shiite water… when Barrow took it upon himself to take on the role of chief of staff of the ‘army of occupation’….
    When he died, that role went to commanders with DIFFERENT philosophies altogether – including one who believed in ‘politics of inclusion’ – rather than in the principle of meritocracy, and one who was a past master at political vindictiveness…

    • Bushie

      The Americans have a saying:

      “If it ain’t broke don’t fix it”.

      Barrow’s Civil Service wasn’t broken but he wanted all roads to lead to him. And as far as he was concerned, if everything wasn’t leading to him then it was broken. His change did not mean change for the better, it meant bending the Civil Service to his will. As a result, the Public Service is mainly working in the best interests of the party in power. That is why we are now seeing a mad rush to appoint DLP members and supporters just ahead of general elections.

      These new appointees would be expected to make life difficult for any new administration and also to leak confidential information.

      Sent from my iPad

  24. Bush Tea November 19, 2017 at 10:26 PM #

    “All Bushie is saying is that all who had the chance did shiite, AND those who did NOT get the chance …ARE shiite….. so we are in potta…


    I am in total agreement with your above comment.

    • If Barbados weren’t so politically polarised, we would stop this nonsense about BLP/DLP and select the best person for the job of managing this country. So far, of all the political leaders vying for the top spot, the only one who seems to fit the bill is Lynette Eastmond. She is bright; has an advantage from both the political and civil service perspective; and she has an LLB and LEC to boot.

      Sent from my iPad

  25. Ask Skinner if it is true that Errol Barrow was going to fire 7 Ministers in 1987 when the grim reaper appeared at his door.Out of that crowd partially emerged the NDP.Ask Skinner if he ever got over that fiasco.Clearly not.As is expected in most countries during Barrow’s,Tom’s and Owen’s time, GDP expanded and the people with it.During Sandford’s and now Stuart’s time,GDP has contracted and so has the people’s standard of living.In other words confusion reigns more often when the DLP are voted into office.Nobody said it better than a diehard Dem,Cammie Broome.He said as a business man he realized whenever the Dems are in office nobody invests in the country.Investment is what drives our economy.You heard it from a diehard Dem,Skins.There is little comparison between the two parties when it comes to expansion of GDP and opportunities for every citizen participating in the country’s success.

  26. @ Caswell
    I agree with you to some extent. I don’t
    even consider Barrow the Father of
    Indepence; I prefer we consider
    Frank Walcott for that title.
    I am in total agreement with you and your
    views of Lynette Eastmond. I can only
    hope she get the hearing she deserves.
    @ Artax et al
    I shall continue to promote the political
    destruction of the BLPDLP , their
    apologists and cronies. I am now
    challenging these apologists to show
    any real difference between these two
    parties. Name any problem that they
    are not collectively responsible for in some
    form or other.
    Public Transport; Housing; Public Health;
    Education; Party Hacks in the Public
    Service and Statutory Boards and services
    Auditor General negative reports; CBC;
    Roads. Every single area of economic
    decline is evidence of the decline that
    these two parties have inflicted on the
    We have now reached the stage of measuring standards of mediocrity and
    Whatever they have achieved has now
    been destroyed by their own hands.
    We need a new direction and it cannot
    emerge from the constipated bowels of
    The BLPDLP.
    Dump them. Dump them Now!!!!!

  27. @ William

    I have to agree with your comments re: “I am now challenging these apologists to show any real difference between these two parties. Name any problem that they are not collectively responsible for in some form or other.”

    I also agree that Lynette Eastmond should “get the hearing she deserves.” However, I am disappointed with her accepting, into the fold, three time loser David Gill and any other disgruntled former member of the BLP (or DLP).

    Gill wasted a perfect opportunity to present his vision for the future, by wasting time discussing the reasons he believed the BLP’s constituency branch did nominate him as that party’s candidate for St. Michael South Central. Gill was unable to convince the electorate in that constituency to vote for him in three consecutive elections, and I can’t see him being successful as a UPP candidate.

  28. Mr skinner I am not tryingto convince you of anything,neither will you convince me.Barbados got to where it is through the BLP and The DLP.Looking at the periods The DLP under Mr Barrow a hero of mine saw great strides in Education and health and Transport.Under Mr Adams The Free hold Tenantries Act,The ABC highway which he foresaw would be needed even from then and he wanted a four lane highway but with serious opposition from the Dems back then who saw it as a waste of money he still proceeded.Then we come to Mr Arthur who further ienchanched things.Three visionaries and you want to place Barbados in the hands of Greville phillips or Ms Eastmond,what is their claim to fame?You can join them and even run for them ,all of them will be lucky to save their deposits,so the choice is clear the DLP or the BLP and I know which one I will be supporting

    • @Lorenzo

      What are seeing playing out is a so-called democracy at work. Obviously there is always a need for policy changes to align with the times. The debate will continue whether the established political parties are fit for purpose and if they have the capacity to adjust. An analogy can be made that the same challenge exist at an individual level.

  29. @ Lorenzo at 5 :47 AM

    Your positions are quite balanced and commonsensical. The electorate can only deal with the candidates and the parties which seriously offer themselves for office. All other surreal positions will be ignored in the interest of safety.

    It is never wise to destroy the fowl coup in order to get rid of the fowls. We need to repair and rebuild those areas that are dysfunctional or tired.

    We have our individual responsibilities. We ought to man up and hold up our end of the tent. Pardon the mixed metaphors.

  30. We have to move forward .There is no turning back. Let us deal with the present so that next year this time we will not be repeating the same expletives.

    Selling off State Owned Corporations will not remove the symptoms of perceived excessive debt, nor falling foreign exchange reserves. The fundamental disease is lack of economic growth that keeps in step with our public and private sectors’ expenditures.

    Keeping at bay the spectre of public corruption lies with the electorate’s perception and their choice of representatives. Unless we have been genetically modified and acquired brain transplants with out our consent,we will make the best choice when the time comes.

  31. It seems that Bernard has been bitten by some kind of cliche – bug.

    That all sounds good and comfy, but the REALITY is that it MAY be wise to destroy the fowl coup and all the mongooses therein …mostly in the disguise of yardfowls.

    Boss, there are individual families who have had the experienced of value, loved ones, turning into demons and parros …who, if allowed, would have taken the whole damn family into the gutter with them.

    WISE family members will not allow the greater family’s well-being to be destroyed by a few demonic parros.
    Fools continue to encourage and empower the demons, in the hope that somehow, things will change for the better…

    Such fools and their monies and assets (such as banks, businesses, utilities, supermarkets …and soon oil terminals and Hotels) …. are soon parted.

  32. Caswell Franklyn November 19, 2017 at 10:58 PM #

    If Barbados weren’t so politically polarised, we would stop this nonsense about BLP/DLP and select the best person for the job of managing this country. So far, of all the political leaders vying for the top spot, the only one who seems to fit the bill is Lynette Eastmond. She is bright; has an advantage from both the political and civil service perspective; and she has an LLB and LEC to boot.

    ALL OF WHAT YOU SAY IS TRUE ; A BRILLIANT PUBLIC OFFICER TO WHOM THE COUNTRY OWES SOME GRATITUDE FOR her negotiating skills when the OECDs urged on by President Clinton were threatening to blacklist Barbados for accommodating offshore companies which brought in much needed foreign exchange to the economy of the country but she is only now proving to be an Arthur stooge in place to cut votes to make the motleys dream of adding primeministership to mayorship dream come true. She has not demonstrat3ed she can win a seat even with the power of an established party behind her and I do not see how she can win one now. She should stick to what she is good at.

    • Charles

      It is your type of thinking that has saddled this country with a lot of dunces in the Cabinet. They have the skill set to win seats but lack the skills to make a meaningful contribution to any aspect of public life. Heaven help us when we can have a minister of finance that have trouble with decimals.

      Also, where is the evidence that she is an Arthur stooge. I don’t know her very well but what I know of her is enough to convince me that the country can benefit from her skills. I can’t say the same about the majority of the Cabinet.

      Kellman has won a seat over and over but can you point to any achievement that would justify having him in the Cabinet and I am told that he fancies himself as a future prime minister.

      Sent from my iPad

  33. @ Caswell
    Elections are won by votes.
    People tend to vote for those who are most like themselves.
    Bajans therefore voted for brass bowls, and Americans voted for Trump.

    Your idea of selecting the best talents for leadership would require a kind of maturity that is IMPOSSIBLE from our current societies – all focused as they are on ‘getting things for themselves’…

    First you would need a community centric orientation in the mind of the population.

    The other possibility was to create a co-operative model with its strong established PRINCIPLES of community mindedness….

    As in….
    “grant that I may not so much seek to be consoled as to console;
    to be understood, as to understand;
    to be loved, as to love;
    for it is in giving that we receive,
    it is in pardoning that we are pardoned,
    and it is in dying that we are born to Eternal Life.”

    But you refused to BUP… 🙂

Leave a comment, join the discussion.