The Barbados Economy and Voter Choice

Submitted by Doc Martin

The DLP has dropped its promised bombshell and the revelations of Mr. Owen Arthur in his press conference given yesterday are like shrapnel! Conspiracy theorists and sensationalists will have a field day not only with Mr. Arthur’s revelations of the alleged malfeasances of the Mottleys but with his motivation for the expose.

But Mr. Arthur also painted a sombre picture for the economy of Barbados. Not that we needed him to do this. Any Barbadian who is willing to understand what is really going on in the economy can do so by perusing at least three readily available official documents: (1) the Central Bank Reports (2) the Annual Financial Statement and Budgetary Proposals of the Minister of Finance and (3) IMF Article IV Consultation reports on the country. (See selected links at the end). Of course, these documents need to be studied together if enlightenment is to occur.

The Annual Financial Statement and Budgetary Proposals of the Minister of Finance are, of course, tinged with partisan political perspectives and the Central Bank is a creature of the government, as the recent firing of Dr. Delisle Worrell illustrates. The IMF Article IV Reports on the country are less subject to local influence and, therefore, offer a more unbiased assessment of the economic state of the country.

The Issues
I would like to address two issues emanating from these documents: (1) what they tell us about the state of the Barbadian economy and (2) what are the implications for the incoming government and by extension, current electioneering.

State of the Barbadian Economy
In summary the documents listed above tell us three things that we need to truly understand about the finances of Barbados Plc:

(a) As a country, we have over borrowed and are now nearing “insolvency”
(b) On a recurrent basis, we are spending more that we are earning.
(c) Government institutions are highly inefficient and this obviously means we are spending more on and in them than is necessary.

Together (a) and (b) are tell us that we are living above our means! That conclusion is not new. In all fairness to the Mr. Stuart, he has said this on more than one occasion. It is also true that the Government has tried to rein in expenditure.

What is most important for Barbadians to understand is that all three of these things are interrelated. We have borrowed to help finance capital expenditure e.g. for infrastructure such as schools, roads etc. (on a household / personal level, this is equivalent to borrowing to build a house or buy a car). But we have also borrowed to help finance current expenditure e.g. paying salaries of government workers, paying utilities etc. (this is like our taking a loan to buy food and clothing, paying the electricity bill etc).

We are also using up our savings (namely national insurance) to finance both of these types of expenditure, so much so that the NIS is under pressure! And worse of all, when we do get money, we channel it into government departments and statutory corporations (e.g. Sanitation Service Authority, Barbados Water Authority, QEH, Corporate Affairs) that are highly inefficient and unproductive.

All of the above are reflected in the 2016 Barbados Article IV Consultation No. 16/279 of states:

The fiscal situation remains challenging despite ongoing government adjustment efforts. The [Financial Year] 2015/16 budget deficit was broadly unchanged at about 7 percent of GDP. Revenue measures, though raising revenue by 1 percent of GDP, fell short of target due to implementation delays.

Within that last sentence lies the culpability of the DLP government viz. “implementation delays”, sometimes referred to as the “implementation deficit”. This general characterization continues in the latest (2017) Barbados IMF Article IV Report which, inter alia, states:

With the growing financing challenges and falling reserves, the government introduced an ambitious budget on May 30, 2017 aimed at significantly reducing the fiscal deficit and shoring up international reserves. However, exemptions to the NSRL, lower-than-expected non-oil imports, shortfalls in some other revenues, and high transfers indicate that the government is likely to fall short of its target…
The adjustment strategy should focus on addressing the high transfers, containing other current expenditures and maintaining a strong revenue effort… Reforms of state owned enterprises should include improved management, cost recovery, reduced services, mergers, closures, and privatization…
A concentrated effort to improve implementation capacity, including by providing clear direction and clarifying expectations, is also needed.

Again, that last statement shows the problem facing the Freundel Stuart administration: lack of capacity to implement. This translates into managerial performance (or non-performance) and therefore, critics may feel justified in charging the government with mismanagement.

Ironically, however, the government could justify its implementation behaviour by claiming that it has been trying to soften the blow on Barbadians. In fact, that is what it is arguing in this current election. The problem is that not many Barbadians are likely to accept this. The man-in-the-street will only be concerned about whether he (or she) is employed, the size of his pay packet and the cost of living. He is not concerned about “fiscal deficit”, “external debt”, “implementation deficits” and concepts of the sort. Life is seldom fair; political life unforgiving.

It should also be noted that these IMF reports support the criticisms levelled by Mr. Arthur and others at the BLP’s pie-in-the sky manifesto. The reader should also note that the Leader of the Opposition is included in IMF Article IV consultations:

The [IMF] mission met with Minister of Finance Christopher Sinckler, Acting Central Bank Governor Cleviston Haynes, Minister of Industry Donville Inniss, the leader of the opposition Mia Mottley, senior government officials, and representatives of the private sector, labor organizations and academia.

Implications for the Incoming Government
I doubt I could a better job of addressing this than Owen Arthur, notwithstanding his penchant for melodrama. According to him (Nation Tuesday 15 May p.14):

The next government will have to dig Barbados out of an economic black hole…What is facing the next government cannot be fixed overnight…It might take three years or even more to even stabilize it…before we can think of giving out benefits to the Barbados society”.

We can liken Barbados Inc. to a family that has managed its finances badly and now finds itself up to it neck in debt, cannot feed itself consistently, pay bills etc. It has several choices, none of them pleasant: if it is renting it needs to find cheaper accommodation; if it has the privilege of having its own home it might have to sell off the property to pay back the bank; it may have to beg for handouts etc!

From time to time, we have seen articles warning Barbadians about their spending and personal finances. Successive Barbadian governments have led us to believe that it is OK to spend and to expect Government to provide a range of free services. The ready availability of credit cards has not made it any easier for Barbadians to exercise personal financial discipline. We have now come to the end of our financial tether and, as I said in my previous submission, there are no pain-free ways out of this mess.

Implications for Voting
Barbados now needs a mix of people to steer the ship of state away from the rocks. As the IMF reports show, the DLP has failed to manage the process of restructuring in a timely manner. They have also engaged in several corrupt practices themselves; for example, they have restored the 10% ministerial cut in salaries at a time when we cannot afford it yet would have us tighten our belts.

On the other hand, the BLP, as the most recent events have shown, appears to be very much out of touch with fiscal reality.

Regarding the UPP, one of their former candidate, Linda Field, has painted a picture which is quite revealing:

Unfortunately, I have come to realize that the UPP is not a serious political organization. It has no structure [and] communication with the leadership is limited to WhatsApp and Facebook. Frankly, I don’t think that Ms.Eastmond has what it takes to lead and I want to make a difference”. (Barbados Today, April 5, 2018).

Solutions Barbados has some good ideas for dealing with efficiency in the public institutions (badly needed according to the IMF) and the issue of integrity. However, their fiscal measures announced in January this year by Scott Weatherhead, are inconsistent with what we know about the needs of the economy:
“Complete removal of the 10 percent NSRL in its entirety; complete removal of the 17.5 percent Value Added Tax; complete removal of the 2 percent foreign exchange commission; reduction of personal Income tax from the range 16 – 35 percent, to a 10 percent flat tax; no taxes on public workers salaries, a removal of import duties, taxes and levies on healthy foods, and a reduction in land tax through our agricultural incentives.”
(Loop News [online] 23 January, 2018)

Unless the party has subsequently come up with brilliant measures for raising replacement revenue above and beyond the current amount required to reduce the fiscal deficit to about 4% (as advised by the IMF), as well as reduce the national debt, then the party is making the same mistake as the others. However, to its credit, and unlike the UPP, the party has strong leadership and highly committed candidates.

Voter Dilemma
Despite what the commentators have said about third parties, a desperate Barbadian electorate has opened a space in its mind for a viable third party. A third party is a new product, an innovation and regrettably, like most people who do not understand what marketing is, the third parties have failed to perceive themselves as new products and therefore, apply well known strategic marketing management principles and practices to this new product. This includes product configuration (ensuring the party has mix of people with different backgrounds e.g. lawyers, economists, strategic management specialists, other professionals), targeting (addressing the needs of multiple stakeholders), positioning (Solutions Barbados for example, is perceived as a party of technocrats) and finally integrated communications (messaging, advertising, promotions, public relations etc. etc).

All of this poses a real dilemma for the voter looking for a real change. However, I do hope that the election will NOT be won outright by either of the main parties and that a coalition will be needed. This would help at least one of the new parties to gain some parliamentary experience, some “first hand” knowledge of fiscal issues and hopefully prepare them for the next election.

My ideal coalition would be made up of the DLP and Solutions Barbados candidates. Given their track record so far, I would not trust UPP candidates NOT to cross the floor!

Selected References
2015 Barbados Budget:


66 comments

  • Well it looks like MAM at least got Fumble to “fumble the ball” (to use an Americanism) on his plan to ram through the cut rate sale of the people’s Hilton before the election. Good going for Mia.

    On hold
    Article by
    Emmanuel Joseph
    Published on
    May 15, 2018

    A meeting scheduled for Monday, May 21 to approve the controversial sale of the Hilton Barbados Resort has been abruptly called off, effectively leaving the future of the Needham’s Point property in the hands of the new administration to be elected next week.

    Dr Justin Robinson, chairman of the National Insurance Board (NIB) – a minority shareholder in the property- told Barbados TODAY this afternoon the NIB had been informed that Monday’s meeting had been cancelled.

    This means the proposed sale cannot proceed in the absence of a resolution by the shareholders, he said.

    More: https://barbadostoday.bb/2018/05/15/on-hold/

    Like

  • Do we agree the heavy focus must be on policy prescriptions for the economy? What about the social component?

    Like

  • NorthernObserver

    A good article.
    I was 98% on board until the closing paragraphs.
    I agree there is a voter dilemma, but the prescription suggested, based on the diagnoses, eludes me.

    Like

  • pieceuhderockyeahright

    @ Doc Martin

    You were going good till you said reinstall the DLP and Solutions Barbados

    That was when I realised that you were an utter madman

    How can you say “given their track record so far…” and then reintroduce the DLP?

    Steupseee

    You said, and the ole man quoteth “…A concentrated effort to improve implementation capacity, including by providing clear direction and clarifying expectations, is also needed…”

    What the IMF is saying in plain bajan needs to be interpreted for you in plain bajan cause you and others who read it had a serious learning deficiency

    ” Improving implementation capacity…”

    Have you ever had the displeasure of meeting “The Dream Team of 2006”?

    Well I going try not to get ban from BU like Baggy get from Barbados Free Press by using the following cuss words

    Dem is the most r#$$h&(€ incompetent ingrunt set of representatives dat Barbados has ever assembled for 10 YEARS!!!

    If you was to scrape together dem collective brains and put in in a black bird, it would fly backwards!!

    You eva talk to Patrick Road, or Jester Inch, or Adriel Nitwit or Chris Decimals Bond close up?

    What de IMF saying is that “clarifying expectations” from a team of mules WILL ONLY HAVE ONE RESULTS “Implementation Deficiencies” consistent with the reflux arising from the northbound end of a southbound cow.

    Well dere.

    De ole man done went and did it aid dem disgusting cuss words so I gine accept me ban now bye…

    Like

  • pieceuhderockyeahright

    @The Honourable Blogmaster your assistance please

    Like

  • Mr W Parkinson

    Barbados is in “Dire Straits” and a financial solution is urgently needed… Citizens are getting into the mood to protest. In my view, the US$ has become a “Mill Stone” around the neck of the country for the last two decades. Initially the US$ helped to create in Barbados an affluent society. Sadly however, mismanagement of the country’s economy has seen the advantages of the US$ fade over the years stated above.
    All the Political Parties must now come together in finding a solution to this massive problem which affects every single Barbadian regardless of wealth or class..! Yes, there’s a class system in Barbados, more so than any other Caribbean Island.
    Unfortunately i’m currently in the UK (earning UK£) on business and will miss the elections..!

    Like

  • Mr W Parkinson

    Barbados is in “Dire Straits” and a financial solution is urgently needed… Citizens are getting into the mood to protest. In my view, the US$ has become a “Mill Stone” around the neck of the country for the last two decades. Initially the US$ helped to create in Barbados an affluent society. Sadly however, mismanagement of the country’s economy has seen the advantages of the US$ fade over the years stated above.
    All the Political Parties must now come together in finding a solution to this massive problem which affects every single Barbadian regardless of wealth or class..! Yes, there’s a class system in Barbados, more so than any other Caribbean Island.
    Unfortunately I’m currently in the UK (earning UK£) on business and will miss the elections..! I’ll be back in BIM end of July to see the election results and of course help the economy in a small way by spending money on the Island.

    Like

  • Doc Martin
    Knows exactly what he/she is trying to do. All of a sudden one week before the election this individual pops up trying to make a case for the DLP by appearing “balanced”. Clear indication of the Dems’ desperation. The bombshell has bombed!!

    Like

  • A friend told me recently and he is right, that there is only one way to vote, because only one thing matters at this point.

    Under the current DLP administration, there will be NO foreign investment, which Barbados urgently needs.

    Confidence is gone, investors do not wish to put money in with the current government.

    The ONLY way out of this is to vote BLP and change the government.

    That is the reality.

    A bit sad, that Grenville et al have good intentions ()well, Grenville anyway), but the country cannot afford to play with votes.

    BLP MUST win for this country to have a future.

    Like

  • DOC MARTIN

    What did you smoke or drink before writing that drivel? The DLP is going out of office, what part about that don’t you understand?
    Have you not seen that the DLP has sent in the night-watchman, George Pilgrim in St.John to at least try to ‘hold a seat’ and keep opportunity to rebuild the much damaged DLP brand alive?

    Like

  • Given what Mottley has laid out as fiscal plans for the economy.i shudder to think that bajans would go down that path of fiscal giveaways a similar path that started the ball rolling towards a high debt leading to a dark hole where barbados is finding it hard to dig its way out.

    Like

  • Similarly to NorthernObserver, “I was 98% on board,” but only until I read the following:

    “We have borrowed to help finance capital expenditure e.g. for infrastructure such as schools, roads etc. (on a household/personal level, this is equivalent to borrowing to build a house or buy a car).”

    Then I had to agree with Kirk Rueladel in asking Doc Martin “what did you smoke or drink before writing that drivel?”

    Like

  • The takeaway is that the ideal result for many is one that will disrupt the duopoly process many have started to question.

    Like

  • Are-we-there-yet

    Pure propaganda by someone who cannot think straight.

    The one rational conclusion from the earlier sections dealing with The IMF Article IV consultations “reports” of 2016 and 2017 has to be that the DLP had so mismanaged the Country that they should not be allowed anywhere near the Barbados Economy. That is absolutely clear.

    The only rational conclusion from the discussion on the UPP and Solutions Barbados is neither party is ready to be influential in any aspect of the governance of Barbados and, given the history of third parties in Barbados, that it is quite unlikely that either of them can actually win a seat in the upcoming elections.

    The only rational conclusion vis a vis the DLP-OSA bombshell is that it is unlikely to cause significant damage since it appears to be a dud so far and actually places OSA in a worse light than it does Mia as there are a number of implicit untruths in his statements in his press conference inter alia. It seems likely to be an evanescent 3-day wonder and talking point that will convince very few to change their vote to the DLP or even away from the BLP. Most voters minds are already made up.

    Re. the apparent unlikely promises in the BLP manifesto, that too will do little to change most peoples perceptions of what is the overarching concern of this election i.e. that the DLP MUST be stopped from further wrecking Barbados.

    We gave the DLP over ten years to improve Barbados. They failed spectacularly. We are not idiots. Not one more day for DEM! The fruit and shady rationale for Stuart’s unseemly holding on to Cabinet power for 3 months longer than he should are now clear.

    Like

  • Balderdash!

    We know that the DLP has presided over a ruined economy and that they have no solutions nor the courage to have been honest with the people for more than 5 years.

    We also know that this election is one the BLP should be winning by a canter.

    We also know that because of the ‘checkered’ past of its leader and the strategic mistakes made with its mini-manifesto, and therefore its overall thinking, a near politically dead DLP is exhibiting signs of life.

    We know with a high degree of certainty that neither party has thus far presented appropriate remedies to the economic ills plaguing Barbados.

    And with just over a week left we are likely to be still unclear, at the end of the day, what kind of ‘pig would we have in the poke’ on May 25, 2018, the day after the elections.

    We know that the third parties and independents have been a waste of time and should be duly ignored.

    We know that there are about 8 days left to signal elections and Bajans are in no better a position than at the beginning of this ‘military’ campaign.

    Everything which has happened thus far has been to advantage sides of the political elites, a result of infighting amongst them. Not primarily to satisfy voters, in and of itself.

    All of these ad nausium quotes only serve to confuse where we are, at this very minute, and the options available to us. We have no clarity!

    The DLP has not even distributed its manifesto. They have benefited from the errors made by the BLP in their mini-manifesto. For them, there is less urgency to stop BLP bleeding,

    But what difference would that make if we should have a PM who seems unsure as to what we can do to save ourselves. A man who is an expert at talking all kinds of shiiite, but critical things that matter most, he lacks the inclination to converse about. He has no deep understanding about economic matters.

    And neither do the people on the BLP’s side presented to us as their brain economic trust. We are not fazed by PhD’s or master’s degrees or claims about being professional economists. This team is clueless!

    As is a MOF who has presided over successive failures.

    Or a BLP unable to emerge from a political milieu, designed for opposition politics, while avoiding the grandiosity of a misguided leadership.

    We well expect Barbados to make a fateful leap into a dark place, these forces demand such.

    Like

  • pieceuhderockyeahright May 16, 2018 3:22 AM Dear Piece, I believe that at sometime in the past I took it upon myself to offer an unsolicited opinion on your use of the vernacular. Apparently, so focused on the style of writing, I lost sight of the significance of the message. At the time, your chastisement was rather mild in response to my rude contribution.

    And now this “If you was to scrape together dem collective brains and put in in a black bird, it would fly backwards!!” Sheakspear, Keats and all the other literary giants could not have been more descriptive and more colorful in their heyday. I tender my humble apology for my earlier transgression and shall in future pay greater respect to your sheer brilliance.

    Respect due.

    Doc Martin on the other hand reminded me of an old saying that goes “Giving a good bucket of milk and then kicking it over”. After a very thoughtful, well presented and scholarly discourse you kicked the bucket over with “My ideal coalition would be made up of the DLP and Solutions Barbados candidates. Given their track record so far, I would not trust UPP candidates NOT to cross the floor!”. Shame on you sir, shame on you. Did you reread your submission before posting it? Did you not see the self-destruct button clearly labeled?

    Liked by 1 person

  • millertheanunnaki

    @ PachamamaMay 16, 2018 8:32 AM
    “And with just over a week left we are likely to be still unclear, at the end of the day, what kind of ‘pig would we have in the poke’ on May 25, 2018, the day after the elections.”

    The ‘pig in the poke will be a either a Bajan boar-hog or sow-pig painted in either red or yellow-cum-blue and marked “For Sale by the IMF”; unless the pitbull Estwick can negotiate a US$5 billion bailout with the UAE with the slick dick Benedict of Boko Haram acting as the go-between.

    The majority of the ‘fudged figure’ reported as foreign reserves is represented by Special Drawings Rights held by the IMF for which an application has to be made for any drawdown to pay for imports during the third quarter.

    The same way we are calling on Mia to explain some tax write-off made over 14 years ago shouldn’t we be asking the current Minister of Finance to give an account for the $300 million in foreign reserves which went missing just after the 2013 general elections and for which, up to this day, no one has given a satisfactory explanation?

    Like

  • The Miller

    We agree that the DLP has failed to take the people into their confidence. And is likely to continue in that vain, if elected.

    Well, if we have to go to the IMF, we should know for certain. Preparations have to be so made. This election should be such a referendum.

    We should know the amount of suffering involved, an exit strategy. Is that too much to ask?

    Certainty, this should not be a time for highly excessive campaign promises unacceptable to the IMF.

    We disagree! We fail to see parallels between the claims against Mottley and the depletion of forex. Both important but of different character, fundamentally, we judge.

    Like

  • Miller why shouldn’t the public be told why Mia had the mitigated gall to take taxpayers money and give to friends and family without first seeking their approval no matter how long it took to come to the attention of the public ear
    It is amusing how the blp yardfowls still continue to harass Carrington to death in reference to an outstanding legal matter of more than ten years between a client and himself which was settled by a court of law
    Now blp yardfowls belive that the matter of taxpayer s money being handed out to every tom dick harry or associate of Mia should not be mentioned or swept under a rug because the time period of happening was more than 14 years ago
    Give me a f..king break

    Like

  • Haven’t various Ministers of Finance, all of them, all parties provided essentially blanket waivers of interest owning on income and other taxes on condition that the taxpayer pays the principal?

    We all know that this is routine.

    And it is routine because even though the financial institutions in Barbados are paying as little as 1/4 of 1% in interest, the Barbados Revenue Authority charges delinquent taxpayers 12% interest compounded.

    And “no” I have never met Mr. Arthur, or Ms. Mottley, or Mr. Mottley, and I am not now, nor have I ever been a member of any political party.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ Mariposa

    Can you explain why David Thompson gave $10 million to his crooked buddy Leroy Parris as a bailout for Clico which went bankrupt shortly after?

    A practice in the USA or UK that would have to prosecution.

    Like

  • Sandals. 25 years tax waiver?

    Like

  • @Kirk Rueladel
    @NorthernObserver
    @pieceuhderockyeahright

    I respect the right of everyone to his or her opinion. However, the one thing that you can always trust most Barbadians to do is “think” with their mouths rather than their brains. The other thing you can expect is pure emotion over matters that require cool thinking about the facts. The third thing you can always expect from supposedly educated Barbadians, is labelling people as a way of dealing with issues. Labeling is a good way to avoid dealing with facts; once you label a man as “terrorist”, “fundamentalist” “liberal” or some expletive, we do not need to examine the facts anymore or even listen to the person!

    I am no fan of the DLP and I am not aligned to any party; as a matter of fact I have suffered at the hands of one of the DLP’s lackeys who is on a Board of an institution with which I have a working relationship. Therefore, I should be the first to wish to see the back of them! You can choose to believe that or not; it won’t change the facts.

    People who claim to be educated need to be able to read relevant materials, weigh facts, draw reasonable conclusions and make reasonable assumptions where necessary. The last time I checked, those were some of the requirements of an educated citizen. So for those who can’t read the lines, between the lines and beyond the lines (as as educator and journalist Gladstone Holder once said) let me layout the syllogism-cum-calculus of my reasoning.

    Like many “non-aligned” Barbadians, I would like to have seen a third party win the election. Outright! Period!
    However, given the preparation of the two main “third parties”, that does not appear likely.
    The economic remedies that need to be taken by Barbados Inc. are clearly laid out by the IMF.
    However, I do not think the DLP has the will to do what is necessary; but they have tried.
    The BLP is out of touch with economic reality; they have other issues to sort out and time is against us.
    Therefore, the only COMPROMISE I see is the forcing of a coalition as outlined.

    In passing, it should be noted that one of the deleterious “side effects” of the party system and first-past-the-post system we have been using is that one has to try to win the election outright. Perhaps this system needs to be revisited. But I digress!

    Barbadians can continue to live in denial or face up to the facts. I too will suffer from some of the remedies that have to be taken. But we can’t eat our cake and have it too. This applies to the individual and it applies to the collective called “Barbados Inc”. May the Lord help us in the coming months.

    Like

  • “All the Political Parties must now come together in finding a solution to this massive problem which affects every single Barbadian regardless of wealth or class..! Yes, there’s a class system in Barbados, more so than any other Caribbean Island.”

    If everyone can’t see that the problems on the island calls for a forced coalition cabinet, to clean up all the shit spewing from the parliament, the judiciary, the bar association, disciplinary committee and every level of the civil service ….well expect more of the same shit.

    Like

  • Corruption. The ten million was a bailout to secure policy holders interest
    Now trying to change the issue at hand which bears a responsibilty on the shoulders of Mia is disingenuous on your part bearing in mind that Mr. Mottley owed the govt money and according to allegations Mia place the better interset towards her father instead of a fair and reasonable negotiation which would have secured the interest to nation and taxpayers
    In my opinion a total disregard which can be easily weighed in the scales of corruption

    Like

  • Corruption. The ten million was a bailout to secure policy holders interest
    Now trying to change the issue at hand which bears a responsibilty on the shoulders of Mia is disingenuous on your part bearing in mind that Mr. Mottley owed the govt money and according to allegations Mia place the better interset towards her father instead of a fair and reasonable negotiation which would have secured the interest to nation and taxpayers
    In my opinion a total disregard which can be easily weighed in the scales of corruption

    Like

  • millertheanunnaki

    @ Mariposa May 16, 2018 9:29 AM
    “Miller why shouldn’t the public be told why Mia had the mitigated gall to take taxpayers money and give to friends and family without first seeking their approval no matter how long it took to come to the attention of the public ear..”

    No problem with your demand for public exposure of this alleged fraud.
    The only problem is that certain (past or present) public servants namely the Accountant General and the Commissioners of Inland revenue/Land Tax would have to give an account of their role in this illegal act and their stewardship as protector of the finances of the Crown.

    Would we not wish to ask the then Permanent Secretary to give an account of his ministry’s oversight in this alleged fraud?

    Where was the Director of Finance to allow such alleged massive financial malfeasance to take place right under the ministerial watch of the same OSA the turncoat Mea Culpa coward?

    How come such a large remission of tax due to the crown without the appropriate Cabinet approval or Parliamentary ratification did not feature as an important (flagged) item in any of the Auditor General’s reports over the 14 year period of financial maladministration and infelicities which occurred under the watch of the financial guru and outstanding economist Owen Arthur?

    Some person(s) will find themselves facing rather ‘large’ law suits in this massive political faux pas deliberately made just to fly in the face of the inevitable upcoming electoral outcome.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Are-we-there-yet

    Doc Martin, you said at 10:39 am

    “Like many “non-aligned” Barbadians, I would like to have seen a third party win the election. Outright! Period!
    However, given the preparation of the two main “third parties”, that does not appear likely.
    The economic remedies that need to be taken by Barbados Inc. are clearly laid out by the IMF.

    However, I do not think the DLP has the will to do what is necessary; but they have tried.
    The BLP is out of touch with economic reality; they have other issues to sort out and time is against us.
    Therefore, the only COMPROMISE I see is the forcing of a coalition as outlined.”

    This makes much more sense than your earlier attempt in the Chapeau Post, but no cigar yet.

    However your conclusions in the last 2 sentences of the above need a lot of work.

    How do the voters FORCE the coalition you outlined, which is a DLP-Solutions coalition? That could only be strategically achieved in our current system by the DLP and Solutions joining forces in sufficient time before 24th to have it thoroughly discussed and capture the imagination of the majority of the electorate within the next 7 days.

    Why is the only compromise you see a DLP-Solutions one? The facts you state point no less clearly to a BLP-Solutions compromise. You have made not one point to suggest that one compromise is better than the other.

    How do you suggest that the DLP will, with your compromise, now have the ability to develop the WILL that would allow them to do what is necessary? Why should the electorate believe that they will magically grow that will after they are elected in a coalition with the two main wreckers of the economy, Stuart and Sinckler, still at the hellum?

    Your attempt is still not evidence of non-alignment. Wheel and Come again!

    Like

  • @ Doc Martin you say “My ideal coalition would be made up of the DLP and Solutions Barbados candidates”.

    DISAPPOINTED!!

    Have you not understood what a Bad Apple does in a Box of the good fruit? Or from a Good Ole Bajan Cook, Have you ever made Pepper-sauce and one bad pepper get way in de batch?… The Whole Darn Infusion Ferments!!

    Someone asked me what I Thought of Choosing between the Lesser of three Evils, B or D or Solutions…My response is Evil is Evil there is no Middle Road. I think Grenville Philips is a man of Principle and a man of Faith with a Vision for Barbados that can become a Reality! Of all of the Parties that are contending, Solutions Barbados does not have any Lawyers and they offer Pragmatic Solutions.

    In my opinion since Bajan’s love Socialism SB logical Solutions seem to be more Free Enterprise Based without advocating an Ideology that may put them at odds with most of the populace.

    From my Simple observation, how does the BLP & the DLP differ in their Ideology??? A Vote for B is a Vote for D…

    The other Two Parties have proven themselves otherwise. Have we not learned that by their fruit you will know them and the only fruit we have seen tasted are Bitter and Rotten…Who wants more of that. That is like saying the Maduro Diet is acceptable and the Bajan people can eat from Garbage Trough happily ever after!

    “NOTHING works- until there are people with enough faith and gumption to try it and not leave it until another time for others to do”.

    The Wrong Choice this time may lead us into Despair for Generations. Why Not Choose a Business man as an Alternative to a Lawyer to manage this Country’s Affairs? By the Way Solutions Barbados does not have a Lawyer in Sight!

    I am very concerned that unless we practice Free Market Principles with less Burdensome Rules, Regulations and Controls, the Reaper lies at the Gate!!

    Economic Entrepreneurs are a Boon to society; Political Entrepreneurs are Another Animal Entirely….

    “There is a Godly Option for Barbados. Vote wisely. Let our Faith Impact our Vote.”

    Do What Is Right & Let The Consequences Follow!!

    Like

  • Are-we-there-yet

    Well-Well

    A coalition is the best solution for Barbados at this time but how does one realistically vote for a coalition government? One can pray that blind Destiny or the Almighty will ensure results that will lead to a coalition but no elector or unstrategic, unacknowledged mix of people voting for individuals in 3rd parties can force a coalition. The history of Bajan elections say emphatically that most of the third party candidates will lose their deposits and that Leroy McClean might spoil the DLP’s choice in St John from winning and that the only third Party candidate that is likely to save her deposit is the former sex worker.

    If Freundel would declare that if he wins his seat he will not accept the Prime ministership for the next parliament and Chris Sinckler makes a similar declaration apropos of the Ministry of Finance it might go a long way to partially cleansing the image of the DLP. But they won’t do it.

    Like

  • Here is a chance to remove lawyers from parliament.

    Like

  • AWTY..actually ya right..a coalition can be forced. only if..

    …, the last Canadian election, voters were working hard at forcing one, it did not quite work out how they planned, but maybe next time they will succeed..these were mostly educated, knowledgeable people.

    in Barbados’ case with the mindless yardfowl brigades looking to get their turn at sucking the taxpayers dry along with their corrupt political masters, it’s harder for an unknowledgeable mix of people and weak 3rd parties to do so ….. a coalition presents a bigger challenge under such negative scenarios, and as you opined will require not only divine, but possibly karmic and supernatural interventions to be a success .in the next less than 2 weeks.

    Like

  • Barbados appetite for a colation would disappear as fast as it was suggested
    The problem lies within a mindset of whats in it for me
    This coalition would have to change the rules that would preference and geared towards a framework of securing the national interest as a patriotic duty
    Now how would such a drastic and fundamental framework impact on the peoples intent of govt providing for all and sundry in my opinion would generate the kind of backlash with cries from the populace of asking to revert to the past.

    Like

  • I am convinced and there is endless proof to that thought ….starting with the AG post and continuing with every lawyer that has blighted and cursed the parliament with their presence since 1966… they are the ones who have destroyed the island and the judiciary…

    Barrow reiterated that in his warning about bajans not getting any justice and don’t expect any at the then Coleridge Street den of vipers…which has since moved to Whitepark Road.

    The one gang you don’t want being part of any coalition, is the one whose time in parliament just expired.

    Like

  • @Are-we-there-yet?? May 16, 2018 11:12 AM

    No-YOU-are-not!

    FYI, I am not interested in whether you believe I am non-aligned or not! That is not the issue! I could infer your alignment based on your submissions but I won’t; it is irrelevant! I prefer to think of you as one of my students (thankfully, a minority!) whose first reaction to any question is to say what pops into his or her head!

    Don’t you think it would have made more sense if you had done some research on the term “coalition” before you opened your mouth to speak? I hope that the other readers do so and avoid thinking that I am referring to a coalition formed BEFORE the election as opposed to AFTER it. Do you not follow international news? Did you follow the recent election in Germany? What is the nature of the government there today? Do you know that the government in Israel is invariably a coalition?

    FYI, I am NOT predicting the outcome of the election; merely expressing a preference! Do I have that right? For sure, I think YOU do!

    While you are there (looking up “coalition”), please also look up the term “proportional representation system” which, I was inferring, is a way put of the problem of one party winning an election outright (and our having to suffer the consequences of that!) IF we had such a system in place AND providing the other parties received the required amount of votes, THEN we would not be HOPING that the character of the new government would be different! I think that Barbadians should demand a change to proportional representation going forward. Are you there yet?

    Like

  • @Doc Martin

    This is the silly season, many will feel challenged to be logical. Added the BU forum is a highly charged space. One has to tune the filter to grab the gems.

    Like

  • @Freedom Crier May 16, 2018 11:14 AM

    Now YOU are disappointing me because you are doing that labelling thing I posted about earlier (May 16, 2018 10:39 AM). You are also not thinking realistically of the polarization of the electorate. Your or my hating Mr. Stuart or Mr. Sinckler is not going to stop people voting for them!

    With this in mind, I am making a case for the electorate to give one of the third parties a few seats… enough to force a coalition. It is the best thing we can do to curb the power of either the DLP or BLP. Are you with me yet? I am saying Solutions Barbados for the reasons I gave earlier. You can choose the UPP for whatever reasons you want. In other words, I don’t want the DLP or BLP to win outright; neither apparently do you! Are you there yet?

    According to our constitution and first-past-the-post system, the party that has the majority of seats i.e. 16 or more, forms the government. No questions asked! If there were to be a tie between the two major parties, I believe we may have to have some run off or re-election (providing someone does not cross the floor!). Do you remember the scare we had in the 2013 election?

    However, here’s a different scenario. Let’s suppose that three, rather than two parties, gain seats; say: DLP, BLP and SB. Unless one of them gets a majority (>15 seats) one of them will have to form a coalition with the other. So for example, suppose the results were: 12:12:6. (same party order as before). Would you expect the DLP to form a collation with the BLP? Rather, we might expect either the DLP or BLP to ask the third party to from a coalition which would amount to 18 (12+6) seats.

    The beauty of it is that the third party gets to bargain with the other for ministries etc and to get agreement on policies BEFORE signing on to the coalition. At any point in time if the third party does not feel things are going as agreed it can pull out of the coalition. That is basically how a coalition works. So, do you see how the electorate can change things if a third party is given some seats (not even win the election outright?).

    Germany, one of the strongest democracies and economies in the Western world went to the polls a few months ago and Angela Merkel had to settle for a coalition with one of the other parties. The Israeli government is almost always a coalition. Why can’t this work for us?

    Seriously, does anybody have a better alternative that meets the objective of SHORT-CIRCUITING THE POWER OF THE MAJOR PARTIES in the absence of a proportional representation system? Ergo, in the face of the stronghold of the BLP and DLP do you see what Barbadians have to do on election day? Let’s stop bitching, think and vote accordingly, folks!

    Like

  • Actually 7 days left to election…but stranger things have happened so just watch and extend our positive energy to the intent.

    Like

  • How can it be silly season eight days away from a very important general election? How does one define silly season?

    Like

  • @Doc Martin

    You are aware that the citizen votes for a member of parliament and not party?

    Like

  • So the LEC ( Leave Elliott Child ) professor 🤓 went on today’s Brasstacks and CRY 😭 his soul !

    He admitted though :

    • He got a waiver of interest !

    So why he CRIED ??

    Oops 🙊

    I forgot the LEC professor now realized that his tax waiver DID NOT have :

    Cabinet approval !

    Parliamentary approval. !

    Oh what a poisoned 🤢 CHALICE !

    The question remains……who did it ????

    So CRY 😭 on ……..professor LEC !!!

    Like

  • NorthernObserver

    @DocM
    “However, I do not think the DLP has the will to do what is necessary; but they have tried.”

    This is a comment I have heard many times recently. I disagree strongly. Verbal intent which had substantiation only in a dream world, does not constitute effort? Any person with second form math, knew the projections put forward year after year were a dream, they required divine intervention to become reality. Barbados needs PERFORMANCE, not a perception of intentions nor effort.

    The ‘good thing’ about a coalition, and I will assume the ‘newer’ party has fewer seats than the established party, is we are likely to be back at the polls in 2 years or less. Given the road ahead, a 5 year mandate to any party could be dangerous.

    I have no issue with DLP as a party, however several of the current members DO NOT COMMUNICATE with those who elected them. The PM is a disaster. And citing Chaucer and Socrates will not in itself produce solutions. The MoF is an abject failure in that role. Post election, Barbadians needs those in charge to communicate with them. To explain the ACTUAL, not the politically spun version, and the options.

    So unless the coalescing groups, have a third party majority, we are left with the leader as either the PM or MAM, since believing they would both lose their seats in far fetched.

    Since the DLP has been unable to flush out the PM or MoF, I would lean towards a BLP-SB coalition, and hope if the indiscretions suggested against the LOO are true, she can be flushed out. All I have is hope.

    Like

  • @ Doc Martin…What you said in your Article and your response that a Coalition is the best thing we can do to curb the power of either the DLP or BLP is all well and good. But you cannot Suck and Whistle @ the same time by Proposing the UNIMAGINABLE to be PARTNERING with those that caused the problem in the first place…that is a Recipe for Devastation and Destruction…

    By the way I do not hate Dem I hate is the System of Governance that Dem RULE by. That is the Ideology I contend against. We are cautioned to use righteous judgment if not in the same way it is returned to us Without Mercy.

    Doc Aren’t you tired of being ROBBED by DEM? Here is where I Stand…

    A people who depend upon a government managing personal needs, personal benefits, and personal responsibilities are owned by the whole instead of being a society of self-owned individuals. The law in a free society is only used for the protection of person and property—you cannot use the law as a tool for force and theft of property and labour, NO MATTER HOW GOOD THE INTENTION—this economic ideology of a “fair share” of another’s labour is the foundation for Communism, Fascism, Nazism, Socialism…

    Like

  • Are-we-there-yet

    Doc Martin;

    You seem to be unaware that you need to have a Proportional Representation (PR) system in place before you can use it to facilitate a coalition Government. We are talking of a system that would effect necessary changes following the upcoming elections and we need to clearly understand the sequencing of critical events. Do you think either the DLP or BLP would pass into law and implement a PR system if they won the upcoming elections alone or in collaboration with one or more third parties, in the face of significantly improving performances from the 3rd parties? I suspect that dominant parties, such as the DLP and BLP, would use that dominance to ensure, to the extent possible, that the current “First-Past-the-Post” system stays in place in the forseeable future as such would stand a better chance of ensuring that they might likely be in power for at least 1 of the next 3 parliamentary terms.

    I agree that a coalition is probably the best result for Barbados’ future at this time. But you can’t force a coalition out of wishful thinking. In the upcoming elections the electorate cannot force a coalition nor can the 3rd parties nor can individual electors. How and when do you propose that an individual elector can do this? How can they strategically effect this result over 30 electoral districts with widely differing single electors? It can’t be done in the current climate, in the current historical milieu, nor the current economic situation that is deceptively painted by various actors.

    I suspect that this will change drastically within the next 3 months when the realities of our situation hit home. Various strategies that might be inconceivable now can then be brought to bear on the situation to force things such as PR, and even Pachamama’s guillotine.

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    Mr Blogmaster, your remark that “You are aware that the citizen votes for a member of parliament and not party?” is a dirty little misnomer of grave distress that really needs to be dismissed from the verbiage of savvy political analysts.

    Where in Barbados or other Westminster Democratic style system have we seen repeatable SUCCESSFUL instances of a member of parliament reelected to his or her seat after DEMITING the party and running as an independent!

    The party affiliation is perhaps the most important variable to victory besides all other key factoids.

    But either way the promotional concept in base form would simply incorporate the total number of votes for the member as his/herparty representative and allocate seats in parliament based on that ratio to total votes cast. (Simple form)

    @Are-We, you are right this is basically an academic discussion but yet I would not dismiss that it could never come to pass because of the power of the duopoly. As most things that demand action if it ever reached a true crescendo for change surely a plebisite of some sort could seek a majority of signatories to force the change despite the duopoly resistance. But alas, that too is more academic verbiage.

    BTW I also agree with and @Northern that it was “outrageous” (word of the week) that the author could summarize his piece as he did. After berating the DLP as basically devoid of intent and incompetent, and SB as clueless mainly he then yoked the nation’s future to a clueless cabal of mal-intended incompentent demons, rather than a clueless cabal of pie in sky, tax giveback pretenders!

    Like both of you I prefer that latter six to the other half dozen and can’t figure out how he could choose otherwise. Ah well.

    Like

  • David

    We heard a government minister, at a meeting somewhere in Lodge Road, proffering that GEORGIE PORGIE should be released form the mental hospital, the mad house.

    Is there any truth to this, or is this just political palaver?

    Like

  • Pay the piper DLP are selling the HILTON just before an election

    Like

  • Piece Uh De Rock Yeah Right

    @ Doc Martin

    Are We ther yet responded to your utopian fancy for a coalition best when he said “A coalition is the best solution for Barbados at this time but how does one realistically vote for a coalition government? …”

    How can such a “collaboration” be achieved in Barbados where people rather the majority of the electorate are fickle persons incapable of discoursing on the most basic of requirements?

    I am going to do two things here.

    The first thing is to ask you to conduct an experiment.

    When you get a chance later today ask five bajans who you know to give you a thorough gameplan to how they would personally jump starting our mono economy?

    Ask them for one suggestion that would permit them to effect this strategy.

    De ole man would bet you that NOT ONE OF THEM WOULD BE ABLE TO DO SO not even for one single idea.

    Do You know of a place in the Middle East called the Gaza Strip? It is between Israel and Egypt and is part of the State called Palestine.

    It is 25kms by 11 kilometers roughly the size of Barbados.

    De ole man would hazard that even in its perpetual state of economic malaise because of the embargo it has been subjected to because of the Israeli conflict, their economy, is not really dissimilar to that of Barbados BARRING THE PHYSICAL MISSILES being fired into their territory daily what is the fundamental difference between the suffering of their citizenry and ours?

    We have been at war with the DLP for 10 years as they have bombarded our citizenry with missiles of incompetence with a savagery that is befitting of Gaza.

    No so as not to get carried away as i does do often, leh me go to me next point.

    What do you think is the currency of this “Stoopid Cartoon” above?

    Mariposa/AC before she was warned by the Fumbles and Stinkliar of the DLP, would have jumped all over de ole man and cussed me from here to Thy Kingdom Come some months ago.

    But they have seen the power of the simple messages for the Simple Electorate.

    What is the point that I am making?

    For there to have been any Coalition IT WOULD HAVE HAD TO HAVE STARTED YEARS AGO for it to have taken hold in Barbados BECAUSE BAJANS HAVE A 10 second attention span

    For you or anyone to come here so late in the game and to seek to prosecute a Utopian ideal for such a coalition is fanciful at best and impossible at worst.

    De Stoopid Simple cartoon above has more chance of being successful AS IT WILL BE than your reasoned passionate and well structured submission BARRING ITS LAST SUGGESTION lololol

    Like

  • Piece Uh De Rock Yeah Right

    @ The Honourable Blogmaster, your assistance please

    Like

  • “BECAUSE BAJANS HAVE A 10 second attention span.”

    better than goldfish, but goldfish don’t need stinking governments .

    Like

  • @David: “You are aware that the citizen votes for a member of parliament and not party?”

    Technically, David; but certainly not psychologically!

    @Are-we-there-yet: “You seem to be unaware that you need to have a Proportional Representation (PR) system in place before you can use it to facilitate a coalition Government”.

    This is simply not correct. Check your “facts”. By definition, proportional representation (PR), especially simple proportional representation – as practised in Sweden – will always lead to some form of coalition government; however, the latter (coalition government) does to require the former, that is, PR.

    Like

  • @Piece Uh De Rock Yeah Right re. “How can such a “collaboration” be achieved in Barbados where people rather the majority of the electorate are fickle persons incapable of discoursing on the most basic of requirements?…..”

    If you are right! But, what about yourself? If you were the MOF what would you do?

    Like

  • Meanwhile the DLP is yet to release a Manifesto

    Like

  • “How can it be silly season eight days away from a very important general election? How does one define silly season?”
    +++++++++++++

    Come off it, my friend…….you are being ridiculous and childish!!!!

    Your above comment is an example of what journalist do during the “silly season.” You did not have anything important to contribute, and as such, you used the space to dwell on a frivolous issue.

    Because you are perhaps aware that, in the UK, the “silly season” is a few months during the summer when journalist who would normally report on political matters, “run amuck” reporting unimportant and frivolous issues, because, for example, parliament is in recess and there isn’t anything political to report………

    ……….you are juxtaposing that with the Bajan custom of referring to the general election campaign period when politicians talk shiite……. as the “silly season,”………….. to basically imply we are ignorant of the term.

    However, in the US, the “political silly season” is normally defined as a period of time when politicians and their lackeys “do or say things that are not sensible or serious.”

    “Much ado about nothing.”

    Like

  • Are-we-there-yet

    Doc Martin;

    Now I see how you des cafuffle yuh students wid inaccurate information. You seem a trifle confused yourself.

    In an established PR system (like Guyana) Parties compete against one another and parliamentary seats are divvied up in a preestablished ratio based on the total number of votes cast for the party in the whole country as compared with total votes cast for the other parties. In an FPTP system like in Barbados and practically all the other Anglophone Caribbean territories people vote for an individual candidate and each individual candidate can claim his own seat, depending only on the party for facilitation of all his requirements for winning. If Barbados had a PR system most of our elections would have been extremely close based on total votes cast and would have often given rise to 15-15 or 16-14 pluralities (but note that the total seats are typically odd integers not even ones) whereas such votes in our FPTP system here has often seen significant differences in total number of seats earned even with very closely matched percentage votes. In Barbados a PR system would have made essentially no difference in the relative proportion of the votes cast, and hence seats won, as compared with an FPTP system. Indeed, 3rd parties in Barbados would not have received enough votes to merit even 1 representative in the last 40 or so years under either system.

    If the 3rd parties get stronger of course there would be a greater likelihood of them achieving a sufficient number of votes to qualify for one or 2 seats and, as the system matures, even more. But that time is not yet here from all I can see or hear from my friends who run the gamut in terms of party support in Barbados. There is a possibility that that time will come fairly soon when voters are more aware or conditions get really bad. But the current BLP or DLP parties would have to actively go to parliament to set up and pass a system that would likely lead to their own demise It might even need a constitutional amendment to change from FPTP to a PR system. Yuh can’t just change to a PR system just so! You can’t just declare dat yuh changing to a PR system just so!

    Like

  • PERFECT TIMING

    For the first time ever, the Orbis Flying Eye Hospital has landed in Barbados.

    http://www.nationnews.com/nationnews/news/158073/flying-hospital-arrives-barbados

    Like

  • “We have borrowed to help finance capital expenditure e.g. for infrastructure such as schools, roads etc. (on a household/personal level, this is equivalent to borrowing to build a house or buy a car).”
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    It is widely recognized that government spending on public infrastructure and the provision of basic education and medical services raises the economic potential of an economy…..i.e. provide a positive boost to economic growth.

    Could you please explain how is this “equivalent to borrowing to build a house or buy a car?”

    Like

  • Less than a week after the Barbados Labour Party (BLP) released its May 24 election manifesto in which it explicitly states that it has no policy on same-sex unions, the party’s St Thomas candidate, Cynthia Forde, is assuring that if elected, the BLP will not be pursuing any gay agenda.

    “Nobody in the Barbados Labour Party is interested in any same sex marriage. We have neighbours that believed in same sex. They were discreet, both man and woman, we tolerated them, we have learned to tolerate people, [but] I am not interested in any man marrying a man or a woman marrying a woman. That is their private life. Do what they feel like in their bedrooms, but do not bring that as part of the Barbados Labour Party’s agenda.

    https://barbadostoday.bb/2018/05/16/no-gay-push/

    Like

  • oops!

    Ahead of Thursday’s manifesto launch by the incumbent Democratic Labour Party (DLP), Barbados Labour Party (BLP) leader Mia Mottley took Barbadians by surprise on Wednesday night, as she pulled out what was said to be a copy of the DLP’s promissory election document.
    The unexpected development came during a BLP meeting at Clevedale, St Michael.

    https://barbadostoday.bb/2018/05/16/mia-unveils-dlp-manifesto/

    Like

  • Piece Uh De Rock Yeah RIght

    @ Doc Martin

    I am not too sure if this supports your subject matter

    ooops! ( I think that i will blame Brother Hants for this ooops thing lolol)

    Like

  • Piece Uh De ROck Yeah Right

    @ the Honourable Blogmaster your assistance please

    Like

  • Are-we-there-yet May 16, 2018 8:45 PM

    “Now I see how you des cafuffle yuh students wid inaccurate information. You seem a trifle confused yourself…Yuh can’t just change to a PR system just so! You can’t just declare dat yuh changing to a PR system just so!

    Please quote me the sentence where I said that we can use or change to a PR for THIS election? You can’t, because I said no such thing!

    On Bloom’s taxonomy of intellectual skills, you have not yet demonstrated competence in the lower order skill referred to as COMPREHENSION. Consequently, I am not sure you will reach the higher order skills of ANALYSIS, SYNTHESIS and EVALUATION….before the election!

    So, here is what I said to you at May 16, 2018 12:19 PM:

    “If we had such a system in place AND providing the third parties received a reasonable amount of votes, then we would not be HOPING that the character of the new government would be different! I think that is a change that Barbadians need to demand going forward. Are you there now?”

    Did you see that “if”…(and the minor premise?)

    Did you also see the statement, “I think that [PR] is a change that Barbadians need to demand going forward”; Hello! “going forward” can’t refer to the current election!!! It makes no sense! We DO NOT currently have PR! See why you would have failed my test? Come on, man! Let’s see if we can think clearly here!

    As I said before, this is a high stakes election and the only way we can break the duopoly is if there is a coalition, that is, if one of those third parties gets six to eight seats (and of course neither of main parties gets more than 15 seats). At least, this is how I understand the constitution. Why is this so hard to understand…and accept? Will you help make it a reality?

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Interested readers are invited to check out coalitions in the UK, our “parent democracy”: N.B. . the UK does NOT have PR. It uses the same system we do – FPTP.

    http://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/coalition-government/
    http://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/minority-government/
    https://www.parliament.uk/site-information/glossary/proportional-representation/
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/15/coalition-governments-what-are-they-and-how-are-they-formed
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_Westminster_MPs
    http://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3742623/coalition-government-general-election-2017-result-dup-conservatives-deal/

    Like

  • pieceuhderockyeahright

    @ Doc Martin

    Me fears de ole man falleth right in that cusp and simian taxonomy you spoke of before

    And I shall ask you to work with me here not as to what a coalition government is composed of that is your 12:12:6 but the how

    Where would BAJANS obtain an insight as to which of the intellectual geniuses like Patrick Toad, or Adriel Nitwit, Minister of Edyashun Ronald WeJonesing or Chris Decimals Bond Stinkliar we would vote for in your suggested coalition?

    Suppose the results was a 14:14:2 and dem two was Patrick Todd and Ronald WeJonesing?

    I is a simple man with even simpler reasoning skills so I ent even get to the coalition yet I jes at the how would it become a reality.

    I am not seeking to frustrate your reasoned submission but only wish to point out that what you are actually suggesting is even more frightening than the existing structure.

    Such a coalition would mean that we would have to do something with our political gene pool to begin with , like eradicate 71.9% of the barely intellectually read simplistic candidates

    Just as an asidewatch how these 3rd parties disappear from the landscape after the 25th.

    They will not remain and build anything that shows where their real commitment is

    They are just along for the short term

    Like

  • Are-we-there-yet

    Doc Martin

    I think both of us did not try hard enough to understand the other’s point or points.

    I was concentrating on what I thought were the main points of your chapeau article and the heresy of strategically forcing an implicit coalition now, perhaps by use of a PR system in Barbados while you were reacting to simple and perhaps even simplistic points I had made. Even though the “fine print ” of your allusions to coalition and PR had exculpatory weasel words, the overall thrust of the article appeared to be that your vaunted “coalition” and “PR” system were suggestions for the “now” and not for the near future otherwise why make proposals that could not work in the current or past political system and climate of Barbados.

    But this is essentially a barren discussion that has no real utility at 7 days before the next elections.

    But really, I agree totally with a coalition as the best bet for us to move away from the stranglehold of the DLP and BLP parties outside of a pachamama guillotine system. But how do we realistically get there from here? If you search the archives here under the pen name Checkit-out you should find that I proposed such an idea prior to the last election. What are the conditions that would allow the possibility of achieving such a system? How can politicians or people like you, or a plurality of the “People of Barbados” as a group, strategically force it? Its important to clearly elucidate the steps for dullards and older folk like me long past their 3 score and ten.

    Uh gone.

    Like

  • Are-we-there-yet May 17, 2018 8:59 AM

    It’s OK my friend! I know where your heart really is. I am really hoping that Barbadians will surprise us and help us turn the corner.

    Cheers!

    Like

  • Are-we-there-yet

    Doc Martin;

    Its young people like you who can make Barbados great again. Even if your mind is made up already. Spend a night or two going through the streamings of the main speeches for both the DLP and BLP and look for the UPP and Solutions Barbados Youtube offerings and use your intellect to weigh the differences. The choices are not as easy as you might think. A strategic decision now that places Barbados’ needs first and foremost, and nuff work later to change the overall system is, imho, the best way forward.

    Like

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 )

w

Connecting to %s