The Jeff Cumberbatch Column – Whose Call is it, Anyway?

Jeff Cumberbatch – Chairman of the FTC and Deputy Dean, Law Faculty, UWI, Cave Hill

One aspect of current popular discussion in Barbados focuses on the moral and political legitimacy of the Prime Minister’s stated intention to have his administration go down to the figurative wire with reference to its tenure in that role. By this, I am given to understand that he proposes to extend the life of his government for as long as may be constitutionally permissible. Some, anxiously anticipating a change of administration, have sought to assert that this would be a clear breach of convention, although there is a patent absence of clarity in identifying the precise convention that he is alleged to be infringing thereby.

To be sure, a convention is built on a long accepted practice, but it is difficult to deduce any inveterate practice with respect to the calling of a general election in Barbados other than that these are usually called when the Prime Minister of the day decides that the time is optimal for his party’s chances thereat.

It appears to be popularly assumed that the date of a general election is always exclusively within the purview of the Prime Minister’s discretion. However, it is submitted that a close reading of the Constitutional text might arguably suggest otherwise.

According to section 61(3) of the supreme law:

Subject to the provisions of subsection (4), Parliament, unless sooner dissolved, shall continue for five years from the date of its first sitting after any dissolution and shall then stand dissolved.

This provision clearly recognizes that Parliament may be dissolved before its otherwise automatic demise.

Ordinarily, the Prime Minister advising or instructing the Governor General to dissolve Parliament would effect this prior dissolution. This scenario is the subject of section 61(2):

The Governor-General, acting in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister, may at any time by proclamation dissolve Parliament …

It is also usual, though perhaps not conventional in the strict sense, for the Prime Minister on such an occasion further to instruct the Governor General to issue writs for a general election. However, there is no provision that expressly requires him to do so. Pertinent in this regard is section 62(1) that reads as follows-

After every dissolution of Parliament, the Governor-General shall issue writs for a general election of members of the House of Assembly returnable within ninety days from the dissolution.

A plain reading of this subsection and its juxtaposition to the previous subsection would suggest at first blush that, on a dissolution of Parliament, the Governor General has an absolute discretion as to the issuance and returnability of the writs for the elections in the thirty constituencies.

However, the Constitution also provides at section 32(1) that ordinarily the Governor General “shall act in accordance with the advice of the Cabinet or a Minister acting under the general authority of the Cabinet in the exercise of his functions other than in certain specified instances including those where he or she is directed to exercise any function “on or in accordance with the recommendations or advice of, or with the concurrence of, or after consultation with, any person or authority other than the Cabinet”; and in respect of “any function which is expressed (in whatever terms) to be exercisable by him in his discretion”.

In addition, the next subsection [32 (2)] immediately and expressly excludes certain functions from the application of section 32(1):

Subsection (1) shall not apply to the functions conferred upon the Governor-General by the following provisions of this Constitution, that is to say-

(a)section 66(2) (which requires the Governor-General to revoke the appointment of the Prime Minister in certain circumstances);

(b) the proviso to section 61(2)which requires the Governor General to dissolve Parliament in certain circumstances);and

(c) section 84(4) (which requires the Governor-General to remove a Judge from office in certain circumstances).

In none of these specified cases, therefore, nor in those that are more generally stated in section 32 (1), would the Governor General be obliged to act in accordance with the advice of a member of the Cabinet as subsection (1) mandates.

The questions therefore beg asking, did the framers of the Constitution intend that a Prime Minister should be the sole authority in respect of the timing of elections in all circumstances of dissolution? Or does that exclusivity apply only in a case where Parliament has been dissolved by Prime Ministerial fiat? And does that imply therefore that if the House automatically dissolves itself through the effluxion of time, as in the current case, that the Governor General then assumes sole discretion as to the election date?

Of course, the answers to these questions turn on the construction of the various Constitutional provisions. Patently, the function under current consideration in section 62 (1) is not among those expressly excluded from the purview of section 32 (1) by section 32 (2), so that if one seeks to argue that the Governor General is to have any discretion at all in the matter, this must be premised on the more general exclusions in section 32 (1) itself. These are first, “where he is directed to exercise any function on or in accordance with the recommendations or advice of, or with the concurrence of, or after consultation with, any person or authority other than the Cabinet”, and, second, “any function that is expressed (in whatever terms) to be exercisable by him in his discretion”.

Plainly, the first category is not relevant here, but the second does demand our further inquiry. While it is easily discernible that any function clearly expressed to be exercisable by the Governor General in his or her discretion would be covered by this provision, it also purports to include beyond this any other form of expression of that intention [“in whatever terms”].

The issue then arises; is a provision cast in the following terms “After every dissolution of Parliament, the Governor-General shall issue writs for a general election of members of the House of Assembly returnable within ninety days from the dissolution” correctly to be regarded as a form of expression in whatever terms that confers a function exercisable by the Governor General in his or her discretion? If it may be so regarded, then the deduction is that the Governor General has the discretion as to the date of the general election once Parliament stands dissolved by effluxion of time, though perhaps not where this has been effected by prime ministerial fiat. The distinction is indeed a nice one.

It is conceded that this interpretation has never been observed or even suggested in our fifty plus years of written constitutional governance. Nor is it likely to find favour with any political operatives now. For one, it flies in the face of the assumed convention of unlimited prime ministerial discretion in most matters, thereby disrupting accepted practice; for another, it has not yet been to my best knowledge the subject matter of any judicial determination and is thus likely to be treated as mere academic opinion and, third, it is likely to result at the current time in partisan division, based not on the validity of an alternative construction of the Constitutional text but on precisely that; partisan consideration.

Our regrettable lack of clarity in this matter is to be contrasted with the drafting precision of the provision in section 69 (1) of the Trinidad & Tobago 1976 Republican Constitution –“A general election of members of the House of Representatives shall be held at such time within three months after every dissolution of Parliament as the President, acting in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister, shall appoint.” [Added emphasis].

97 comments

  • Dentistry Whisperer (M. Pharm. D) LinkedIN

    Jeff, Germany, India and England have had female PM’s. Why is Barbados mimicking Jamaica?Haynes Darlington (M. Pharm. D)

    Like

  • Caswell Franklyn

    Jeff

    What happens if the Prime Minister refuses to advise the Governor-General to call an election within the ninety-day period?

    To me, it would seem that the PM lost the right to name a date when he allowed Parliament to automatically dissolve.

    Like

  • As if a country stuck in an economic quagmire needs a prime minister who wants to create history. To what end Mr. prime minister? Also the question is posed to the Cabinet.

    What is the role of the Opposition in the farce being played out? Several QCs are be found in the BLP stable.

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    Mr Blogmaster, the learned Dean notes that “[he is] given to understand that [ the PM proposes to extend the life of his government for as long as may be constitutionally permissible” …. He essentially asks the question: so what has the PM done that is so egregious or illegal?

    Is it not fair then to say that unless the PM uses his current ‘unfettered’ power to declare martial law thereby initiating take over by force of arms there is nothing to be done! What really can BLP QCs do at this juncture other than palaver endlessly… No laws have been broken!

    You have boldly chronicled the many instances where the Stuart govt have obliterated traditions and principals which many considered sacrosanct to our supposed ordered way of life, so what more has he done but squashed one more.

    This too will pass…and this too is ample further evidence of his hubris and the govt disdain towards its citizens…this should be the final purposeful argument to X out their arrogance and venality!

    That’s what the QCs and all others should be working towards.

    Like

  • Can you imagine that not a SINGLE one of those RH members of parliament (right honourable?) has had the decency to stand up meaningfully in the public interest (like Comissiong does)…. in the face of such a wicked onslaught on Bajan values…

    Every last one of them must be completely asinine and totally disconnected from their public responsibilities ….
    Either that….
    ..or they must be possessed by forces beyond our comprehension.

    See if wunna can work out then …why they built the monument with the pitchfork
    …and then two of them went and got baptised in shiite on the South Coast…..

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    Oops…principles are obliterated; whereas principals are just obliged to keep their mouths shuttered!

    Like

  • @Dee Word

    What happened when the people protested and this government led by Stuart pulled back from the solid waste tax as one example? If the PM has sought to impinge on the conventions and niceties of the system of government should we the people ignore?

    Like

  • Dribbler …You could really keep your lukewarm posts to yourself …

    No laws were being broken during slavery either boss…
    …and that too passed …. after four hundred years
    – and even so, people like you are still shackled in the mind with the attitude that ‘this too will pass’
    …the attitude of a vassal
    …of a vessel of brazen construct

    REAL people are able to think BEYOND what the shiite laws happen to say at any particular time….
    REAL people understand their intrinsic VALUE – and DO NOT TOLERATE shiite….

    BUT…
    Brass bowls can have shiite actually flowing in their streets for YEARS..
    while they wait peacefully for ‘this too to pass….’

    Boss – Stay in Canada and drink the Toronto waters….
    Please.

    Like

  • millertheanunnaki

    @ Jeff C: The BU legal expert and the guru of Constitutional matters except when it comes to his LEC holding student Hal Gollop (QC):

    “The issue then arises; is a provision cast in the following terms “After every dissolution of Parliament, the Governor-General shall issue writs for a general election of members of the House of Assembly returnable within ninety days from the dissolution” correctly to be regarded as a form of expression in whatever terms that confers a function exercisable by the Governor General in his or her discretion? If it may be so regarded, then the deduction is that the Governor General has the discretion as to the date of the general election once Parliament stands dissolved by effluxion of time, though perhaps not where this has been effected by prime ministerial fiat. The distinction is indeed a nice one.”

    The ‘most’ reasonable interpretation of this provision for the layman is that general elections to the HoA (Her Majesty’s yard) must be called and writs expressing the will of the people as to whom should be their representatives in that ‘yard’ in accordance with the spirit of the Magna Carta must be returned to Her Majesty’s local representative within 90 calendar days from the date the last Parliament stood ‘dissolved’, that is, 6th March 2018.

    Any breach of that window of time must be subject to the exigencies referred to in Sections 61, subsection (4) and (5) all designed to protect the existence and integrity of the ‘State’.

    So Bajans you can expect elections to be called and results returned to Her Majesty’s representative any time between tomorrow and any date in the first week of June 2018; unless Barbados declares war against the rats of the South coast and invokes a state of emergency due to the lack of foreign exchange to feed them into a lazy state of obesity.

    But then again history can be indeed be made (again) if your ‘estranged’ primus inter pares finds himself in a real life-threatening emergency on his last taste of junkets while up a shopping creek with no medical paddle in sight.

    Now the question to you Dear Jeff is what does Her Majesty’s loyal Opposition have to play in all of this local copycat Westminster fiasco initially designed in accordance with the terms of a gentlemen’s agreement between the Crown and its subjects but now being ‘abused’ by third world tin pot dictator in the making whose role model has now be refashioned from the likes of a kingmaker in JCT to one of President Kabila of the DRC in the making?

    Since there is no Guy Fawkes hero to emulate what about whispering in Her Majesty’s ears through a missive from the people in Opposition that ‘She’ needs to clean up her backyard in Barbados before another Moyne Commission is required?

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    BushTea, rather typical response from you isn’t it…hyperbolic (slavery as an institution compared to a legal wrangle on Parliament’s dissolution) and irrelevance on where one may be domiciled (Bdos derives as much and in some cases more benefits from external forces.

    Deal with the facts bro.

    @Mr Blogmaster, I do not suggest the people ignore any niceties or conventions! There is an overpowering wonder about free elections and the ability of citizens to deal with recalcitrant, elected officials…VOTE THEM OUT!

    That sir is the ULTIMATE protest.

    Why are we making Stuart into some evil genius with his dipsidoodle dissolution dance. Why? He is acting within the law but outside what we have come to expect since we gained independence…. but seriously do we need THIS act to validate our verdict of the DLPs tenure??

    Talk forcibly with an X… that Mr Blogmaster is one protest from which he would need not pull back !

    I hear your arguments …but just don’t see any further palaver needed than a forcible judgement to demand dismissal…

    Like

  • Is a functioning democracy defined by the opportunity of the people to place an x on a ballot?

    Like

  • Jeff Cumberbatch

    Jeff

    What happens if the Prime Minister refuses to advise the Governor-General to call an election within the ninety-day period?

    To me, it would seem that the PM lost the right to name a date when he allowed Parliament to automatically dissolve.

    @ Caswell, To answer your first question, we would be firmly in a constitutional crisis. As for your opinion, my suggested interpretation the Constitutional text certainly supports this.

    Like

  • Jeff Cumberbatch

    What is the role of the Opposition in the farce being played out? Several QCs are be found in the BLP stable.

    @ David, once Parliament is dissolved, the Opposition has no greater constitutional role than that of any other group of citizens. Perhaps more politically persuasive yes, but constitutionally, no, I would think.

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    Mr Blogmaster..re “Is a functioning democracy defined by the opportunity of the people to place an x on a ballot?”…Ahem, YES.

    As succinct as your query…as blunt in response.

    Stuart has NOT disrupted that right. To all intents ours is still a functioning democracy. Very unlike the supposed free elections in Russia or Turkey upcoming or those in Zimbabwe and Venezuela.

    Like

  • Jeff Cumberbatch

    Now the question to you Dear Jeff is what does Her Majesty’s loyal Opposition have to play in all of this local copycat Westminster fiasco initially designed in accordance with the terms of a gentlemen’s agreement between the Crown and its subjects…?

    @ Miller, as above to David. Note that Her Majesty has no authority, except perhaps theoretical, in Barbados

    Like

  • @Jeff

    The comment was meant to highlight the legal talent at the disposal of the BLP (Opposition) to offer a challenge if there is an opportunity. Based on your piece the PM is on good legal grazing?

    Like

  • Mr Blogmaster..re “Is a functioning democracy defined by the opportunity of the people to place an x on a ballot?”…Ahem, YES.

    On this let us firmly disagree.

    Like

  • Jeff Cumberbatch

    The comment was meant to highlight the legal talent at the disposal of the BLP (Opposition) to offer a challenge if there is an opportunity. Based on your piece the PM is on good legal grazing?

    David, my piece was mainly exploratory. I am convinced it is right in law, but doubt that it will fly elsewhere in light of its seismic implications for the current context…

    Like

  • Well Well & Cut N' Paste At Your Service

    Stuart is misusing the 90 day extension that exists solely for powers of emergency…it is called abusing the system.

    There is no legal reason to reconvene or extend a parliament that has now completely expired.

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    Nothing wrong with disagreement, Mr Blogmaster…clarity and transparency is always the goal.

    Without deep delves into pol science, please advise what else defines a functioning democracy at its MOST fundamental other than free and fair elections held at well ordered intervals??

    The problem of course with free will is that citizens stupidly abrogate their right and then vehemently complain when their freely done acts are used by smarter people to benefit those smartfolks designs.

    Exhibit A: CA/Facebook folly- people freely exhibit daily every freaking facet of their life on a social platform and lordie lord then get totally discombobulated when smart wags take those insights and shepherd them to spend their money, choose life partners and select certain candidates!

    Those actikns by the smart folks Mr Blogmaster do not take away the citizenn’s free will…simply exposes our naitivity (stupidity).

    If we are concerned deeply then do NOT broadcast our every like and dislike so openly…Delete all social maybe!

    Like

  • This is not a function of law but: Either hurry up and pee or get off of the potty. There are those who under the current circumstances may even use stronger language but the fact of the matter is that Mr Stuart and his merry band of bandit have passed their useless shelf life. Why are we discussing whether this turn of events is within the letter of the law or not? For heavens sake, just get up and go!

    Like

  • Jeff Cumberbatch

    Why are we discussing whether this turn of events is within the letter of the law or not? For heavens sake, just get up and go!

    @FP, If not law, then what? Anarchy?

    Like

  • @Bush Tea
    “REAL people are able to think BEYOND what the shiite laws happen to say at any particular time”.

    It surprises me that you continue with this line. Don’t you know that our society is one of mimicry?

    Perhaps I do not use this phrase in the same sense as VS Naipaul as I have not read any of his efforts, but the whole archipelago consists of nothing more than mimic men.

    Some play the game well, some will even convince you that they are originals. But we all lack the spark that move us to action and to set our own course.

    Know and accept this fact and you will no longer have an expectation.

    Like

  • David March 25, 2018 at 9:31 AM #

    “Is a functioning democracy defined by the opportunity of the people to place an x on a ballot?”

    David BU

    Are you defining “a functioning democracy” only within the context of a political system where citizens choose a governing administration through free and fair elections?

    In my opinion, “a functioning democracy” goes beyond recognizing the right of the electorate to choose which political party represents them in parliament………… and by extension regionally and internationally.

    The electorate should also have the right to observe how the elected conducts the business of government and criticize them accordingly……….. and hold them accountable for their policies and conduct during their tenure in office. Additionally, the electorate has an obligation to express their interests and opinions.

    If we accept these facts, then the actions of any governing administration should be based on the consent of the electorate.

    Through the election process, “power” temporarily passes from the electorate to the elected. Therefore, the elected should RECOGNIZE the electorate as the ULTIMATE political AUTHORITY. But this is accepted ONLY at election time when politicians, in soliciting votes, remind the electorate that those seeking to be elected “are servants of the people.”

    If under circumstances where the electorate is eager to go to the polls, and a prime minster decides for his own self interest, to undermine the rights of “the ultimate political authority,” by holding fast to a legal technicality, which prolongs his tenure in office……..

    ……….then we really don’t know the true definition of a democracy.

    Like

  • @Jeff “@FP, If not law, then what? Anarchy?”
    No, not anarchy Professor but “Just get up and go”! Have we reached the stage where we need a law to tell us what is morally right or wrong or when we have overstayed our welcome ? Did our mother not teach us what is right from wrong? Do we need a law to tell us that if we find a wallet filled with money that it does not belong to us? Do we need a law to tell us that if our every attempt at solving a problem over period of eight years results in reduced returns then maybe, just maybe a law is not needed make us get up and go?

    A wise man once said that if you aren’t part of the solution then maybe you’re part of the problem. What is your informed opinion Jeff? Will this administration be part of the solution or part of the problem by remaining until the “law” makes them get up and go?

    Like

  • Stuart sees his fees and perks are due and payable for 63 months after March 6th 2013.Its as simple as that.The Chamber of Commerce or the Private Sector Association or The QC’s of the BLP or the governors of the Bar Association should challenge this non sensical delaying tactic in the Courts as is done in the USA where all these ambiguous matters are brought for clarification once and for all.Barbados is losing investment opportunities because of this foolishness.I think Caswell has a point.

    Like

  • @Artax

    The question was answered by former PS Peter Laurie on today’s Brasstacks show. Are you listening?

    Like

  • @Gabriel

    The downside to the BLP personnel fighting this matter in the court is the potential political fallout on the eve of an election.

    Like

  • The majority of you have been calling PM Stuart “do little” for years.

    Why do you now expect him to wake up from his long slumber and ” do something “?

    Unless you have a way to force him to set an election date why not switch your focus to

    CRANE BEACH and COVERLY ?

    Like

  • @ Jeff
    FP, If not law, then what? Anarchy?
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Boss, anarchy is not the antithesis of ‘law’.
    In fact, our Pacha has been a constant proponent of anarchism as a social construct now for some time on BU….

    When ‘Law’ is decided by RH jokers (right honourable) – as is almost exclusively the case now in Barbados, then anarchy in fact becomes the wise man’s only sensible option.

    When a government can pass a law effectively making it more profitable for someone to dump litter into a cart road or gully – rather than take it to the proper dump….
    When a government can come up with the ridiculous shiite tax on Bajans…

    …What else is needed to tell us that anarchy is URGENTLY needed?

    @ Dribbler
    What other response did you expect from Bushie…?
    It comes from association with entities who are the same yesterday, today and forever….
    LOL
    ha ha ha
    But you no doubt got the point….

    Like

  • We have been contending for years that none of these countries are democracies.

    That we have been fooled for centuries by elected dictatorships pretending to be democracies

    The results of the next elections will only serve to reinforce the impulse of the dictatorship of Fruendel Stuart – in the person of Mia Mottley.

    That this system cannot compel a PM to do the right thing long after the people should have had a say can only lead to the unavoidable conclusion that the citizens of Barbados are no less bent towards dictatorship than a cowardice Fruendel Stuart.

    Like

  • pieceuhderockyeahright

    I think the ignorant word is saying that BARRING FUMBLES INVOKING THE EMERGENCY POWERPLAY Bajans are saddled with one option which is to wait THEN VOTE DE DLP TO RH OUT!!!

    De ole man believes that Fumbles is aware that his tenure is done and is solely ensuring his income during his retirement AND BELIEVE ME HE IS PERMANENTLY RETIRED FROM ANY LEGAL CAREER POST HIS SHAMEFUL PRIMEMINISTERSHIP

    @ The Luminary Mr Jeff Cumberbatch

    Would a normal citizen have a locus to bring a constitutional challenge against this aspect of these election issues?

    Would the matter be heard?

    By whom?

    Do you believe that if it were heard the outcome would be synchronous with a more clear message? rather interpretation that what currently exists?

    Since only you and David Come Sing a Song are lawyers, and since he will not go up against his cousin’s incoming administration WILL YOU?

    Like

  • Yes Bushie!

    We plead guilty as charged, not by you, for being the anarchists we are.

    Furthermore, we are unrepentantly so.

    Jeff is not a political scientist, but that has never encumbered him from attaching the ‘man-in-the-street’ meaning to anarchism, as a stand-in, for the substantial political philosophy that it is, has been.

    And there are many variants of anarchism but centrally this political philosophy is held by people who distrust ‘government’ and all hierarchical systems generally, as we do.

    You may say that anarchism applies intent to purpose – to self. It espouses that people can, for themselves, on a daily, minute to minute, basis be the masters of their own destinies.

    We were never convinced, and never will be, that citizens of any area should invest all their collective power within any subset of individuals only to, with cap in hand, turn around and ask these same people for rights, some of that very power.

    Some people, like Georgie Porgie, even go as far as to contend that all leaders are ‘appointed by god’ to justify the unjustifiable. Anarchists reject this notion.

    In spite of several negative connotations and some underdeveloped notions Wikipedia gives a general view of anarchism for the beginner. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism

    We, here and now, do not want to be too much more explicit. But everything we say, have said, comes from this framework

    Willing to live or die an anarchist!

    Like

  • Since the current election conundrum seems to have flummoxed the resident Constitutional expert we are engaging in some seasonal kite flying in trying to answer the question posed. I have a simple remedy why not change Election laws to mandate a fixed date every four or five years? Will this happen? Hell No! Although the LOO has made statements affirming that she would take that path if her Party becomes the next Gov’t. It won’t become reality for the simple reason that when politicians in Barbados achieve power they exercise it to its maximum and a fixed date wouldn’t support that objective.

    Like

  • @ Sargeant
    Good answer, but it is MUCH too specific and may lead the innocent (Dribbles) to think that this is a narrow matter that can be easily addressed.

    The real reason it will not be done is that we have – and will continue to champion- a shiite system of governance that is SPECIFICALLY designed to undermine the majority interests…. while fuelling the albino-centric imaginations of the few….

    PATENTLY obvious solutions are routinely dismissed in favour of mindless, inefficient, economy-wrecking exploits ….things that boggle the mind….

    -Things like levying a ‘tipping fee’ and then having to spend twice as much cleaning up gullies and cart roads…
    -Things like facilitating an albino centric foreigner who previously pissed on Paradise beach with 40 years of tax free sweetness…
    -Things like selling off the GOOD family silver ..that actually earned profits…
    -Things like planting river tampering in place of sugar cane….

    NOBODY can be that stupid.
    These things are done to achieve specific, targeted, hidden (secretive) objectives.

    However if the BB people are foolish enough to sit and ‘wait it out’, as suggested by the dribbler, then the favoured few will continue to kick the ball (and with two on call per male brass bowl – there are many available) down the road.

    Like

  • If I were the BLP, I would stay far away from any legal challenge. Let moutta Bushie go file a case. Barbadians are seeing who is really power hungry.

    Like

  • Well General Elections in Barbados will be held after His Majesty King 👑 Freundel Jerome Stuart return from the Commonwealth conference in the U.K in April 2018 .

    Now , I believe that sharing such information is historic

    For the first time in Westminster system of government. – a sitting PM has given the opposition parties a clear………heads up when General Elections will be held !!!!

    His Majesty has created history…….once again !!!!

    Like

  • Jeff Cumberbatch

    FearPlay :“What is your informed opinion Jeff? Will this administration be part of the solution or part of the problem by remaining until the “law” makes them get up and go?

    Bush Tea:“However if the BB people are foolish enough to sit and ‘wait it out’, as suggested by the dribbler, then the favoured few will continue to kick the ball (and with two on call per male brass bowl – there are many available) down the road.

    We cannot talk the talk, said no one ever. Of course we will wait it out. We are Barbadians are we not? Nuff talk, little action.

    Like

  • Well Well & Cut N' Paste At Your Service

    Fractured Fool…..will Fruendolittle be visiting the offices of Cambridge Analytica on Oxford St…..there is much history to be made there still.

    Like

  • LOL @ Enuff
    If you were the BLP…??!! …. IF….? ….F??? 🙂

    Looka…
    Don’t mek BU laugh do!!!

    …and the reason the BLP won’t file a case is simple…
    Would Satan bring a case against Lucifer?
    Would you expect the non-leper Roy to bring a case against Wilkinson?
    …or vice versa?

    And boss…
    When Bushie brings his case …it going be cat piss and peppa ’bout here…
    Just wait til the Big Boss Bushman come back …and bring Bushie’s brand new whacker….

    You will be cool though …cause you is Bushie pal….
    LOL
    ha ha ha

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    But what action is really needed @Jeff and all!

    I did a Google search on Bajan elections and this jumped off the query list (caps my emphasis): “General elections were held in Barbados on 21 February 2013. They were the FIRST post-independence elections where the election date was announced FIVE years after the last general election.

    So in sum this is the SECOND time that this use of the full five year entitlement has taken place as the ’08 parliament was elected on 15th Jan. Clearly Stuart has taken it one step further than Arthur did but what a brouhaha over his ineffectual gamesmanship!

    To what avail any further non effectual court action…one which surely must fail as there is no law being broken!

    And in practical terms if the PM has contravened some law and a case is heard immediately what exactly will be the court sanction…other than to set a date certain in time forthwith before the next three months expire, or give the GG that mandate….

    What a waste of resources that would … but political opposition dynomite…is that the aim here with this court action folly !

    To mimic the Americans..this is a wonderfuly technical Nothing-Roti being garnished with too much hot sauce!

    Like

  • Bushie

    Spoken like a true Calvinist

    Like

  • @de pedantic Dribbler March 25, 2018 at 10:12 PM #
    I did a Google search on Bajan elections and this jumped off the query list (caps my emphasis): “General elections were held in Barbados on 21 February 2013. They were the FIRST post-independence elections where the election date was announced FIVE years after the last general election.
    So in sum this is the SECOND time that this use of the full five year entitlement has taken place as the ’08 parliament was elected on 15th Jan. Clearly Stuart has taken it one step further than Arthur did but what a brouhaha over his ineffectual gamesmanship!

    The Feb 21, 2013 election was also called by P.M. Stuart, not P.M. Arthur.

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    @Burnham, thank you. Indeed.

    I wanted to highlight that this is not new by Mr Stuart but had OSA on my finger tips apparently.

    Since ’86 the longest period between elections was 4 yrs and 8 months but since DLP power in “08 we now have the full five year period being used up.

    Insidious, callous or even arrogant but certainly not illegal.

    Like

  • Is there perhaps being an opportunity born – by these ‘testing of the constitutional arrangements’, for citizens to accomplish a much needed bypass; of the peculiar system of Westminster government (with flawed electoral beginnings and derelict economic outcomes) in which we have been too long, locked?

    Like

  • Dribbles…. you STILL don’t get it….do you?

    Do you understand the concept of RIGHTEOUS INDIGNATION AND ANGER?
    Do you grasp the idea of putting RIGHT before might?
    Do you not get the concept of COLLECTIVE MORALITY – where the collective will of the people can be strong enough to not only FORCE leadership behaviours, but to actually formulate what the LAW dictates.

    Go to court shiite!! ..in Barbados? …and get the case called in 2035?

    If the STUPID unions were not just as lukewarm and compromised as you seem to be, they would have built on the momentum RIGHT after the big march – put the fear of GOD into Froon’s ass, and either shown him the door – or FORCED elections by a TOTAL shutdown back then.
    This would have saved Barbados PLENTY grief …and perhaps even plenty shiite flowing on our streets.

    Instead, they waxed lukewarm, hot and cold, up and down, …and then went back to begging the Devil for favours…. or as you put it, waiting for ‘this too to pass….’

    Steupsss…
    Hopeless brass bowls…..

    Like

  • @Jeff

    “Note that Her Majesty has no authority, except perhaps theoretical, in Barbados”

    NOT TRUE, Her Majesty as Leader of the Commonwealth countries has absolute power do do as she’s sees necessary, up to including having a Commonwealth military take over of Barbados and it’s affairs. This would be extreme indeed, however should Barbados present situation develope into a dictatorship then you can bet this would indeed happen.

    Like

  • Ping Pong March 25, 2018 at 6:36 PM #

    NOT TRUE, Her Majesty as Leader of the Commonwealth countries has absolute power do do as she’s sees necessary, up to including having a Commonwealth military take over of Barbados and it’s affairs(Quote)

    Evidence, please.

    Like

  • Andrew Simpson March 26, 2018 at 7:03 AM #

    ……..to accomplish a much needed bypass; of the peculiar system of Westminster government (with flawed electoral beginnings and derelict economic outcomes)…(Quote)

    Evidence please. Apart from the traditional arguments, what is wrong with the first-past-the-post system of elections (strengths and weaknesses?); and how does the Westminster system lead to a ‘derelict’ economic system?

    Like

  • Wily Coyote March 26, 2018 at 8:01 AM #

    (Apologies to Ping Pong, technology at fault.

    NOT TRUE, Her Majesty as Leader of the Commonwealth countries has absolute power do do as she’s sees necessary, up to including having a Commonwealth military take over of Barbados and it’s affairs(Quote)

    Evidence, please.

    Like

  • @Jeff

    You have to realize as every country belonging to the Commonwealth Countries organization of states has Her Majesty is Chief Commander of their individual military organizations. Agree this is generally a mostly ceremonial position, however its also functional when necessary. This is in fact a deterrent for Commonwealth countries becoming rogue states without in country proper democratic process.

    Barbados as a country is generally insignificant however any political leanings outside the norm will quickly draw the intention of countries which enjoy Caribbean stability and influence, not only Commonwealth Countries.

    Like

  • There were marchers on Saturday throughout the United States with over 800,000 alone in Washington. March for Our Lives would not be
    inappropriate in Barbados based on the actions of this befuddlement for the past five years BUT at this point, would it really matter? And further, how many would attend? We the sheep, are already signaling to the next administration that they can do whatever they wish to us once elected. We may bleat but never take action with our feet.

    Like

  • @Hal

    I’m surprised Hal by your lack of knowledge about the obligations and responsibility of the Crown in the UK and Commonwealth Nations. Check the following link which applies to Queens powers in the UK and every Commonwealth Country she is Head of State.

    http://royalcentral.co.uk/blogs/insight/what-are-the-queens-powers-22069

    Like

  • millertheanunnaki

    @ Hal Austin March 26, 2018 at 8:13 AM
    “NOT TRUE, Her Majesty as Leader of the Commonwealth countries has absolute power do do as she’s sees necessary, up to including having a Commonwealth military take over of Barbados and it’s affairs(Quote)
    Evidence, please.”

    The evidence is contained in the Constitution the Supreme Law of Barbados:

    CHAPTER IV
    THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL
    28. There shall be a Governor-General of Barbados who shall be appointed by Her Majesty and shall hold office during office or Her Majesty’ s pleasure and who shall be Her Majesty’ s representative in Barbados.

    (1) Whenever the office of Governor-General is vacant or the holder of the office is absent from Barbados or is for any other reason unable to perform the functions of his office, those functions shall be performed- (a) by any person for the time being designated by Her Majesty in that behalf who is in Barbados and able to perform those functions;

    Like

  • Jeff Cumberbatch

    NOT TRUE, Her Majesty as Leader of the Commonwealth countries has absolute power do do as she’s sees necessary, up to including having a Commonwealth military take over of Barbados and it’s affairs. This would be extreme indeed, however should Barbados present situation develope into a dictatorship then you can bet this would indeed happen.

    Dear WC, you have a most vivid imagination. You should write novels.

    Like

  • Jeff Cumberbatch

    There shall be a Governor-General of Barbados who shall be appointed by Her Majesty and shall hold office during office or Her Majesty’ s pleasure and who shall be Her Majesty’ s representative in Barbados.

    (1) Whenever the office of Governor-General is vacant or the holder of the office is absent from Barbados or is for any other reason unable to perform the functions of his office, those functions shall be performed- (a) by any person for the time being designated by Her Majesty in that behalf who is in Barbados and able to perform those functions;

    @ Miller, not you too. The appointment or designation is not made by Her Majesty ex propio motu, or acting in her own discretion , she appoints whomsoever she is told by the Prime Minister to appoint. She is not “Queen” of Barbados! As a judge of the JCPC once said, “that is theory and has nothing top do with practical reality”.
    Let go of her apron strings!

    Like

  • Jeff Cumberbatch

    You have to realize as every country belonging to the Commonwealth Countries organization of states has Her Majesty is Chief Commander of their individual military organizations. Agree this is generally a mostly ceremonial position, however its also functional when necessary. This is in fact a deterrent for Commonwealth countries becoming rogue states without in country proper democratic process.

    Barbados as a country is generally insignificant however any political leanings outside the norm will quickly draw the intention of countries which enjoy Caribbean stability and influence, not only Commonwealth Countries.

    @ WC, you realize of course that this is mere wishful assertion with no basis whatsoever in law? What did she do in Grenada in 1983? Or was the dec icon Thatcher’s?

    Like

  • Wily is crazy, too many slaveminded people still exist….should there be any reason to remove a dictatorship from Barbados…outside forces…including UK will have to be requested and invited by other member states in Caricom.

    how quickly everyone forgot the US was invited to remove the animals Coard and return Grenada to some semblance of peace, the UK showed no interest whatsoever.

    Like

  • when you become sovereign, you are basically on your own, that is why there should be no symbolic nonsense of a dying monarchy still polluting the weak minds of the perpetually slaveminded in Barbados and the Caribbean, it is doing more harm than good…..

    all the monarchy nonsense definitely should not exist still for the next generation soon to be born and should be relegated to the dustbin of history where it belongs.

    Like

  • the beast of buckingham palace is practically on it’s deathbed, stop invoking it into the lives of current and future generations of black people, let it die so it can stop haunting and tormenting the earth and it’s people…..

    .all that decades of taxpayer funded education totally wasted so Wily can believe the people on the islands are still owned by an old dying white woman in UK….

    and we wonder why young black people are lashing out in such violent anger..

    get rid of the destructively useless symbolisms.

    Like

  • Wily Coyote March 26, 2018 at 8:34 AM #

    There are enormous gaps in my knowledge, but one thing I do know is that the Crown (not to be mistaken with the Queen) has no power to mandate any military action in the UK or any other Commonwealth country. What about those countries that are Republics ie Guyana?
    In the Uk this power lies in parliament, as delegated to the prime minister and her/his Cabinet. Since Iraq and Tony Blair’s weapons of mass destruction, parliament must now be consulted.
    .

    Like

  • I seem to recall that the granting of independence to Barbados is an Order-in-Council and any change to Barbados’s political future would require further approval of ‘Her Brittanic Majesty’ and Bajans should know that they are powerful non resident personalities and entities that have a say regardless of the impressions one would hear from the local liars and wild boys.Further,there are those locals who would prefer an accommodation with Britain and Brexit might allow a future Barbados to return to a semi autonomous relationship with the U.K.Little England is still Bimshire,a county like Hampshire,Berkshire,Leicestershire etc.Read the tea leaves.Barbados will not be allowed to go the route of other failed Caribbean States.

    Like

  • Well Well & Cut N' Paste At Your Service

    Gabriel…all of that is a figment of your imagination…step into reality, as a matter of fact, stay where you are, future generations will instinctively know what is in their own best interest and act accordingly, once they have reviewed history.

    Like

  • Wilys comments have obviously tingled a lot of BLACK COLONIAL nerves, like it or not Barbados being a signatory to The Commonwealth of Nations is subject to significant Royal powers, mostly ceremonial these days are however still enshrined in law. If Barbados steps politicaally out of line and agrievates the other Commwealth Nations they’ll either booted out of the club or brought unceremoniously back inline. Interdependence has its limits.

    Gutter crawling for bagans is close at hand and don’t be surprised if their are more BLACK KNIGHTS circling than WHITE KNIGHTS. Only opportunistic saviors are a foot. Bagans have allowed their politican elite to reign uncontrolled and are now about to suffer ireputable consequences.

    Like

  • Jefferson Cumberbatch

    Gabriel, I do not know whom you have spoken to, but your spiel above is based on a misconception of what Independence really means. And the nostalgic offering below is a mere fantasy of those who clamour still for a white ruler…

    *…might allow a future Barbados to return to a semi autonomous relationship with the U.K.Little England is still Bimshire,a county like Hampshire,Berkshire,Leicestershire etc.Read the tea leaves.Barbados will not be allowed to go the route of other failed Caribbean States8

    Like

  • Jefferson Cumberbatch

    *, like it or not Barbados being a signatory to The Commonwealth of Nations is subject to significant Royal powers, mostly ceremonial these days are however still enshrined in law.*

    Would you be so kind, dear Sir, as to refer us to the exact legislative instrument?

    Like

  • @Jeff

    I understand you educated to Bajan standards, following the blog articles and replies must be difficult for you, see reply to Hal and included link.

    Like

  • BU does have it’s share of the slaveminded, longing to be slaves aching and aching to carry everyone along on that demon ride to nowhere right there with them..

    ALERT: this is a new era, many black people have brilliant minds handed down to them by their ancestors and are quite capable of thinking for themselves without being anyone’s slave…you will be taking your slave longings to your graves, by yourselves.

    Like

  • Jeff
    There are those who hanker after the old ties that bind.There are those who think Barbados and Bermuda occupy favoured status in the ‘natural order of things’.Lingering on the door step of the Commonwealth Office was something EWB railed against but EWB was never omnipotent and so his bravado is long past and Barbados is at Junk and Pauper status compliments of the said same party he led.EWB said one day Bajans will wake up and find they no longer have a country.That man was a prophet.

    Liked by 1 person

  • millertheanunnaki

    @ Cumberbatch March 26, 2018 at 9:20 AM
    “@ Miller, not you too. The appointment or designation is not made by Her Majesty ex propio motu, or acting in her own discretion , she appoints whomsoever she is told by the Prime Minister to appoint. She is not “Queen” of Barbados! As a judge of the JCPC once said, “that is theory and has nothing top do with practical reality”.
    Let go of her apron strings!”

    So what are you saying, Jeff? That the Constitution, as it reads, is just a complete farce of a written parody of Westminster mimicry?

    Are you saying that HRH is nothing but a ventriloquist dummy of the British PM and, by extension, Her ‘appointed’ junior dummy in locus Barbadensis is just a puppet of the Local dictator aka Primus inter Pares?

    No wonder the Constitution is made to look so often like an asinus Africanus observed daily more its many breaches than its observance when it comes to the protection of the rights and the ensuring justice for the ‘ordinary citizen’.

    You have just posited the perfect argument to justify the renaming of the post of the balls less GG to that of another impotent puppet president for the Republic of Barbadoes.

    If HRH cannot protect Her loyal subjects from the excesses of the Crown’s servants then who in God Almighty’s kingdom would protect us from those of a primeval menace in the form of a dictatorial PM?

    But have no fear Jeff, for your dream will soon be coming true as sure as your royal bright blue day of a dying white queen will soon be exchanged for a black (k)night or a wicked dame of the darkness in the Bajan republican realm of the banana variety.

    Liked by 1 person

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    Mr Cayote, you write, I suspect, as many of us do to stand atop our lil soap box. Dean Jeff and a few others actually educate and clarify when they scribble here…so I wouldn’t accord your current posts as nerve tingling …just soap box sophistry (Bajan ole talk).

    I too am only educated to a Bajan standard so I am unable to appreciate how we can be an independent nation with our own voice at all world bodies and yet be controlled by (in your own words) a ceremonial head of state from the UK.

    But do shout as loud as you want atop your bully pulpit there in the square and enjoy yourself!

    BTW do answer the query from the Dean re why the Queen did not order her troops to Grenada in the ’80s…another of her minion nations who dared to act against her authority, if she is the supreme leader of us all !

    Like

  • @Jeff

    “Dear WC, you have a most vivid imagination. You should write novels.”

    NOT into fiction novels like some on the blog, only write authoritive engineering articles, sit on engineering advisory boards, education directive boards etc. Mis- management of a nation insurance scheme however is not one of my credentials.

    Like

  • “So what are you saying, Jeff? That the Constitution, as it reads, is just a complete farce of a written parody of Westminster mimicry?

    Are you saying that HRH is nothing but a ventriloquist dummy of the British PM and, by extension, Her ‘appointed’ junior dummy in locus Barbadensis is just a puppet of the Local dictator aka Primus inter Pares”

    that is the reality…that is why there has been stagnation, the island keeps regressing…ya have a PM who quotes Shakespeare with a mentality from 100 years ago, he don’t even know who Shakespeare was, only what was told to him, he never once mentions the greatness of his African ancestors or changed the British themed curriculum to an African themed history of facts and truth about the majority population’s ancestry for the last 2 generations to know from whence they came or understand the greatness that resides in their DNA, neither had any of the previous prime ministers….there can be no progress when they are all still stuck in the shadows of slave masters, still mimicking and parading and pretending.

    there can be no moving forward when there are so many slave minded black people still trying to recruit other blacks to become slaves to the UK again…

    Like

  • it’s no surprise they mismanage everything, hence most of the NIS pension fund ended up in the hands of white thieves, they have no confidence in themselves to STOP copying the failing, flailing british system, no confidence to do things the right way outside of what was created for them.

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    @Miller…you are jesting, right! You dissect the complexities of religious dogma with a clarity that impresses but here you assault the simple wording of our constitutional doc so recklessly!

    HOW can the Queen direct anything here in BIM without the direct input of our PM?

    Do you actually believe that the prideful men who took us to independence (throughout the region) would allow themselves to be directed or controlled (beyond the current fancy ceremony) by an external white person! REALLY.

    This debate is obviously a Lenten period attack on common sense so I hope the entire blog can say …stop talking and tempting foolishness, do!

    Like

  • Frustrated Businessman: Animal Farm sequel playing out in Bim.

    What is so desperate about this entire ‘intervention’ debate is the fact that anyone has even considered that our gov’t and national leadership would be such abject failures that we would be contemplating going cap-in-hand to anyone for help.

    There was never any chance of economic recovery under Fumble’s Fools but I doubt anyone ever considered they would sink to this level of national frustration, desperation and international embarrassment.

    Like

  • millertheanunnaki

    @ Well, Well March 26, 2018 at 3:40 PM #

    You must- at the end of the dark day- take your ‘black’ hat off to the white people especially the British guided by the bullshittery of the English.

    How can a former insignificant segment of human kind move from being hungry cave dwellers to conquer a whole race of people from the Mother continent in such a short period in human history?

    Blacks can be easily tricked into giving up their rights to Mother Nature’s blessings by giving them false gods (created completely in contrast to their own image) to worship and making easy accessibility to artificially-created food to turn them into spiritual and physical zombies.

    Don’t be surprised if the Chinese resort to the opening of churches offering free food to laced with mind-altering substances to attract stupid blacks into their web of conquest to secure a constant supply of much needed minerals and metals needed to fuel and support their ultimate goal of world economic domination and by extension political dictatorship never seen since Genghis Khan.

    Easy access to the riches of Africa including the enslavement of its naïve people is what gave the European especially the British the opportunity to dominate the known world. The Chinese are just following suit in using their turn at the African trough of pillage and plunder.

    Like

  • @de pedantic Dribbler, Jeff, and others

    The Barbados Constitution states the Govenor General, as sole authority, will issue the Election writs, in my ignorant understating the Barbados Govenor General is acting for Her Magesty the Queen of the Commonwealth Nations. And some of you suposidly educated individuals think she has no authority, my understanding of educated and morons must be questioned.

    If Barbados wants to sit on the potty to shit then follow the established doctorine, otherwise go the way of a Republic, Dictatorship, Communist state etc. and stop the BLACK wineing.

    Like

  • Wily Coyote March 26, 2018 at 4:18 PM #

    You are not alone. I have said before, there used to be a subject which school children took at O an A level called British Constitution, which taught us about the way we were governed. Ten the wise guys changed the A level to Government and Politics, which changed everything. I believe they have now dropped the O level.
    But even many trained lawyers do no understand the British Constitution, the Westminster model which is much talked about.
    .
    @Wily Coyote March 26, 2018 at 4:18 PM # Just think: in the UK, parliament rules. Not the Queen, not .the prime minister, not the Cabinet.

    You at e t alking about Henry the 8th powers. That is history.

    .

    Like

  • “How can a former insignificant segment of human kind move from being hungry cave dwellers to conquer a whole race of people from the Mother continent in such a short period in human history?”

    black people are the easiest race to be fooled into anything, as long as it’s someone who does not look like them feeding them bullshit and telling them it’s gateau.

    the real sin on their own souls will be if they allow themselves to be again controlled by these modern day halfwitted british, allow themselves to be convinced that they should be used as modern day slaves to enrich UK…if they allow that, they will be more than deserving.

    Chinese dont linger if they are not wanted, they are not as savage as the British, but African leaders are still to weak mentally.

    Like

  • millertheanunnaki

    @ de pedantic Dribbler March 26, 2018 at 3:57 PM

    On the face of it, you are reading more into my naïvely comical critique of the Barbados Constitution (the Supreme Law of the Bajan Land) than was implied.

    Would you say that the ordinary man- not on the Clapham omnibus but on the ZR to Oistins- would interpret the Constitution, first drafted at that auspicious “Ye Old Mermaid Inn”, as it reads and not come to the same’ expectant’ position that the supremacy of power lies within the hands of Her Majesty the real white Queen Lizzy or future replacement King Clown Charlie or Baldie Willie Winkie?

    So why not put aside the ‘English inherited’ hypocrisy and make a man or woman out of the political adolescent called Barbados?

    Why not declare Barbados a republic and tell the Brits to ‘F’ off for real, sewage and all?

    We can bet you dare not try that shit of a cry for total and undisputedly legal political independence when too many of your tourism white eggs are hatching in that British royal basket to which the little England’s umbilical cord could never be totally severed; pips, crowns, pomp, pageantry and royal paraphernalia including the award of medals for political party support and for being good knights and dames from St. Andrew and St. George and ‘hardworking’ party yard-fowls.

    Try removing Nelson to the bottom of the Careenage like Cecil Rhodes statue and see how the same Bajans would cut your political throat faster than you can say “Jack Robinson” is a son of a member of the Order of Independence for Scotland.

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    Phew, @Milller, glad to know you were waxing comically!

    I have always looked with amusement at the Republicanism debate because in reality all we would be doing is changing the ceremonial pomp and pageantry from an association with your Harry Kin Royal Hotshots to a locally incestuous association of our royal hotshots (also known as RHs)!

    We have the best of both worlds as you suggest..absolute Independence but yet perfectly desirable interdependence as needed with the Lil England claim to fame!

    @Cayote, if your” understating” that “the Barbados Govenor General is acting for Her Magesty the Queen of the Commonwealth Nations” means that she actually has any direct authority on matters of state here in Barbados then I am pleased as punch to be considered one of the local “morons” for my opposite interpretation.

    Don’t you think it startlingly amazement that Queen Elizabeth has ABSOLUTELY no DIRECT control of the British Forces or ANY other such operational UK state institution yet you are making a case (seriously too) that she has such control in Bdos!

    SMH!

    Like

  • there is a price to be paid for living in dead slave masters shadows, kowtowing to those same dead people’s descendants and REFUSING to become fully independent and self sufficient, the island is paying that price now.

    either move away from those blighted shadows or continue to regress.

    Like

  • Wily can see the point that Jeff, Caswell and others are making with respect as to who/whom under the Constitution has the responsibility to call the election when parliament is dissolved by time and not the prime minister. As the intent of the Constitutional authors is unknown, then this issue may indeed need resolution by a Constitution Court. The question is who/whom would initiate this constitutional review and the procedures thus involved if the government of the day is already dissolved. Could someone from the general populace initiate such a review.

    Questions posed are outside Wilys knowledge base but I’m sure there are some BU Constitutional attourneys that maybe able to present some ideas.

    Like

  • Ah, the wonderful Republican debate raises it head again along with the soon to follow “Remove Nelson” chorus. This brings the sinking of the Titanic to mind. Were there Barbadians on board for that fateful voyage I can just imagine them discussing if to approach the captain and make an offer for the furniture or approach the bar to enquirer if the Hapoy Hour was still being honored or even demanding a refund of their passage. Really people? This ship is sinking rapidly and we are here debating Republican status?

    Our generously nostrilled jackass has rushed legislation through Parliament that gives the police unfettered powers of arrest and then
    for reasons known only to his anus allows Parliament to dissolve without setting an election date. There is a vast difference between “lawfull”, “decent” and “honorable” and using the law as an excuse to engage in dishonorable practices goes to show a measure of the level of the individual. You can dress up a pig and put lipstick on it but when all is said and done, you still have a pig.

    There is a theory in management of an individual rising to their level of incompetence. The level of incompetence on display is certainly a new way of creating history.

    Like

  • millertheanunnaki

    @ de pedantic Dribbler March 26, 2018 at 5:33 PM

    You have so cleverly responded in a fistic bout of comic relief to affirm what a royally deep blue sea of an asinine ‘hole’ in which Barbados now finds itself after promising to one of the suspect sons of the same Queen Lizzy, one Prince Edward of Wessex- not the pussy-whipped King clown the V111- in 2012 and again in the year 2014 the year to celebrate the 375th of the 3rd oldest Parliament in the Commonwealth aka the former British Empire that Little England will be cutting its childish apron strings and marching on to be a forced-ripe adult in 2016 as an appropriate 50th birthday gift to its now fully matured people now ripe for a banana republican status.

    Come on Dribbs, if a little two-bit country can’t even deal with its own shite in a fully potty-trained manner do you really feel it is ready to really punch above its weight in the playgrounds for big boys and girls called the financial shark holes without a ‘royal’ hand to hold?

    Liked by 1 person

  • millertheanunnaki

    @ Wily Coyote March 26, 2018 at 7:02 PM #
    “Wily can see the point that Jeff, Caswell and others are making with respect as to who/whom under the Constitution has the responsibility to call the election when parliament is dissolved by time and not the prime minister. As the intent of the Constitutional authors is unknown, then this issue may indeed need resolution by a Constitution Court. The question is who/whom would initiate this constitutional review and the procedures thus involved if the government of the day is already dissolved. Could someone from the general populace initiate such a review.”

    WC, now don’t be a ‘road runner’.
    Stand your ground for you are in solid intellectual grazing with the questions you pose to the BU legalists including the doyen from the, Lieutenant General Jeff C, with his arsenal of ammunition supplies from the ‘powdered’ academia stored on the Hill.

    The question of who will guard the guards still stands resolute.
    For if the HRH has no power to instruct Her representative in Barbadoes the dummy GG to tell Her Prime Minister what to do then who has.

    It clearly cannot be the same dummy GG who is, in the eyes of the anti-HRH battalion, is a mere rubber-stamping mimicking creature of the same acts of instruction from the same Primate inter Pares with no ‘written’ ratification necessary from the higher echelons of the HRH realm.

    Now let’s get ‘really’ hypothetical and ask the same distinguished dean with his legal faculties in tact what would happen should the same PM-given his predilection for recalcitrance- pushes the envelope and goes further to sap the nerves of the people to test their patience and ‘practically’ creates history by disregarding the 90 days provision; and without the declaration of a state of emergency based on the exigencies stipulated at Section 61, sub-section (4) or (5) of the Supreme Law carries on sine die as if he has appointed himself Lord King Fumble of the realm with his band of merry men and women around the cabinet feeding from the trough filled with the taxpayers’’ expensive’ swill with or without the figurative severed figurehead of the dummy in Pilgrim House.

    Seeing that he has already overstayed his 5 year period which his government had contracted with the people (his ‘real- real’ boss) in February 2013 then who would be expected to remove this loitering but growing ‘dictatorial’ menace from the scene, if not the loyal guards of HRH, the external regulator of all things democratic à la Westminster in Her ex-colonies still, de jure, under Her wing of surveillance?

    Like

  • @ miller

    The question is…WHO WILL?

    Martial Law under the aegis of THE BARBADOS DEFENCE FORCE until such a time preparation is made for the call of an election should it exceed the 90 day extended period.

    Maybe the Constitution is being rewritten in the correct format while these posits converge on this topic. As most “Commonwealth Nations” has done so or in the process of doing so. Of note, the new GG is currently in the precincts of the Crown.

    Further to the “confusion” of letters of Independence, its worth in gold vs a subterfuge stratagem of Crown control, one wonders why our currency carries faces not of the British Monarchy still having “as head of state, a GG.

    It maybe what this delay to call the elections is what this is all about… and don’t forget the haste of amendments to law…with gifts from the Chinese and special gear.
    a trying to connect the dots.

    Like

  • Further to that,
    WHAT IF the whole Saga is about LEGACY, one that would boast of TOTALLY loosening ALL ties FROM THE MONARCHY?

    Would one consider GREATER the total emancipation from the Westminster rule in winning the war at the expense of total drudgery of economic and social construct of your nation while playing fiddle with lyrics and analytics to render bank holidays … what a rabbit hole!!

    Like

  • Caswell Franklyn

    Everything is coming together quite nicely to ensure a situation that would allow extra-constitutional governance by the DLP.

    The intention was first hinted at when Ronald Jones let the cat out of the bag when he allowed the threat to crack heads and shoot people to fall from his lips.

    Then they got rid of Commissioner Dottin and refused to appoint the officers that he recommended for promotion. Instead, they promoted the officers who they believe would carry out the instructions to crack heads and shoot people. Also, they also refused to appoint Commissioner Griffith’s recommendations. They now have the people in place who they would rely on in the event that there is any opposition to them ruling by extra-constitutional means.

    The next step entailed amending the Police Act to give the Attorney General and the police sweeping new powers that would infringe people’s constitutional rights.

    When the Chinese offered assistance to the country, instead of opting for much needed garbage trucks or buses, these idiots chose military equipment, including water cannon, to suppress any dissent.

    It would appear that the Government now has the desire to unconstitutionally prolong their term in office. In addition, they have the personnel and equipment in place to hold on to power.

    And don’t forget that Blackett predicted blood flowing in the streets. Maybe he, like Jones, could not keep their secret plans confidential.

    Sent from my iPad

    Like

  • It matters not the current intent, many scenarios are currently presenting the outcome of seeds poorly sown…from which strong consideration should have been weighed against moving in the service to self construct.

    For those who forcefully took the lands of Africa are now paying a heavy price, though not the initiators, being the offspring, is inheriting the sins of their forefathers. Pity that the “highly educated” makes mockery at known outcomes under guise of deception, infallibility and fraternal bonds.

    Fear not, for NO AUTHORIZE INTENT shall find root, …only exposure and JUSTICE.

    Look around you and see the principle in action. it is not what you say BUT what you do.

    Like

  • correction…Fear not, for NO AUTHORIZE INTENT should read…NO UNAUTHORIZE INTENT.

    To add…it is not what you say BUT what you do, and more so WHAT YOU THINK.

    Like

  • For those of you with an interest in the criminal law, Archbold’s is no more. It has been replaced as the significant document of the courts. The end of civilisation.

    Like

  • Leviticus 23:22
    “And when you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap your field right up to its edge, nor shall you gather the gleanings after your harvest. You shall leave them for the poor and for the sojourner: I am the LORD your God.”

    And because this COMMANDMENT is so important it is repeated in:

    Deuteronomy 24:19
    “When you reap your harvest in your field and forget a sheaf in the field, you shall not go back to get it. It shall be for the sojourner, the fatherless, and the widow, that the LORD your God may bless you in all the work of your hands.

    And in Barbados for the last 21 days Freundel Stuart and his band of merry men and women have been reaping the political fields up to the very edge, they have been gathering the gleanings, taking every cent of their salaries and benefits.

    Is the pastor from Marchfield, and his band of merry men and women unaware of these COMMANDMENTS?

    Does it mean then that the Holy Scriptures mean nothing to these people. That they do not desire that God blesses the work of their hands?

    In the case of the Crane and the Prime Minister what is being done may not be illegal, but it is certainly UNBLIBICAL, WRONG, IMMORAL, UNETHICAL.

    Shylock too demanded the pound of flesh to which he was entitled. And we know what the word Shylock has come to mean.

    And we wasting time talking about legalisms, linemarks, accounting, constitutions etc.

    Come let us reason together, let us talk about right and wrong.

    Like

  • Pingback: The Jeff Cumberbatch Column – The Parliamentary Interregnum | Barbados Underground

  • Pingback: The Jeff Cumberbatch Column – A Year of Constitutional and Governance Issues | Barbados Underground

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

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s