Transparent Incompetence

Press Release issued by leader of Solutions Barbados, Grenville Phillips II

There is a refreshing amount of transparency with the current administration.  Unfortunately, it seems to be used as part of a public relations campaign rather than to improve public policies.  The passage of the Data Protection Bill last week is a recent example.

The national organizations representing: doctors, lawyers, bankers, and digital businesses, submitted their concerns to the Joint Select Committee of the House and Senate (the Committee).  Their concerns generally affected their members.  The Committee responded by dismissing almost all of their concerns.  Their response has been shameless silence.

Solutions Barbados’ concerns focused on issues that could harm the public.  A review of the Committee’s minutes revealed the interesting ways the Committee used to dismiss our concerns.  Our recommendations, and the Committee’s responses, follow.

Interpretation:  We identified several grammatical errors.  The Committee responded: “typos happen and they will be fixed in the final Bill.”  After reading the passed Bill, grammatical errors were still easily found.  For example, on page 15, “unit other authority” should read “unit or other authority”, and “by the any enactment” should read “by the enactment”.

Section 10.3:  Any individual can ask the data controller to amend or erase their data.  For a data controller with reasonable doubts about the person’s identity, Section 21.14 states “the data controller MAY request the provision of additional information necessary to confirm the identity of the data subject.” (Section 21.14)

To address imposters, we recommended that the optional “may”, should be replaced with the non-optional “shall” or “must”.  The Committee’s response: “My understanding is that this provision was put here to give the controller flexibility in terms of confirming identity”.  The only flexibility it gives is for the data controller to behave badly.  They passed the bill with this harmful vulnerability in place.

Section 22:  This section made it an offense to transfer personal information, to countries that did not respect human rights with an “adequate” level of “appropriate safeguards”.  Section 23 tried to define “adequate”, and Section 24 tried to define “appropriate safeguards”.

We recommended that a Schedule containing an approved list of countries, or a negative list of countries, should be part of the legislation.  The Committee stated: “It is suggesting that we try to define adequate, and appropriate safeguards as it relates to section 22”.  We were suggesting no such thing.

The Committee dismissed the idea of a list, because they did not want to keep amending the Bill every time the list was amended.  They evidently did not understand that a Schedule can be amended by the Minister at any time, without having to go to parliament to amend the main legislation.

Section 55.4:  This Section gives the penalty for operating as data processor, without being registered, as “a fine of $10 000 or to a term of imprisonment of 2 months or to both.”  The Profession, Trade and Business Registration act states a penalty of $500, and no imprisonment, for this type of offence.

We were concerned about the discrepancy in penalties for the same offense.  The Committee ignored our concern and responded: “It just makes that null and void because they are not creating professions, therefore, that one is not relevant.”  So much for sober second thought.

Sections 68 & 69
:  We were concerned about the requirement to hire a Data Privacy Officer, whose allegiance appears to be to the Government appointed political Commissioner.  The Committee ignored the close relationship between the Data Privacy Officer and the political Commissioner, and simply dismissed this concern.  Amazing.

Section 73.1:  We were concerned about a glaring loophole that allowed confidential information to be leaked.  This section states: “The Commissioner and a public officer … shall keep secret all confidential information … EXCEPT insofar as the Commissioner authorises that person to release the information.”

The Committee’s legal resource stated: “this particular provision is very common when you are dealing with functionaries”.  So, they left the glaring loophole, for political mischief, in place.

Section 74:  This section allowed the Commissioner and their staff not to be held liable for their mistakes or negligence.  We recommended that the standard for negligence should be the same for all professionals.

The Committee went back to their go-to loophole-retaining statement: “this is a common provision again that is put in place in terms of functionaries”.  Well, that explains why all Barbados legislation to address political corruption seems to have loopholes.

Section 85.2(d):  This section allows the police to: “inspect and seize any documents or other material found on the premises”.  We recommended that the business owner should be allowed to make copies of documents seized, especially if the material seized is unrelated to the charge, and was needed to continue their business.

The Committee seemed to think that businesses run by magic.  Further, they decided that making copies of seized documents “is not something that we would wish to do at this stage or at any stage.”  Are charged persons not entitled to a copy of the evidence against them?  Since when did that change?  And where is this hostility to businesses coming from?

Grenville Phillips II is a Chartered Structural Engineer and President of Solutions Barbados.  He can be reached at

71 thoughts on “Transparent Incompetence

  1. August 13, 2019 12:35 am
    Dottin to head security for UN meeting

    Former Commissioner of Police Darwin Dottin and one other former senior government official will have lead responsibility for organizing security …

    Ain’t Barbados a ‘ transparent ‘ place ?

    The said Dottin who was ‘ brought ‘ back from retirement and presided over 33 murders , so far for 2019 ……is heading off to the UN to represent Barbados on SECURITY ISSUES !

    Oh my gosh !

  2. Slightly off message.

    Is it possible for a foreign company to use the name of a sovereign country in its company name? The company is called AfriOre International (Barbados) Ltd and it is a subsidiary of a South African platinum mining company called Lonmi. Its head office is registered in Roebuck Street Bridgetown.

  3. @TLSN

    Another offshore business; a big growth area for us, more foreign earnings. Rubbish. When will we ever learn. The basic question is: why do these companies want to come to Barbados? What is in it for them?

  4. Grenville,

    You said that people have been either sacked, threatened with the sack or refused jobs because of their membership and/or support for Solutions. This is a democratic issue. Can you plse put more meat on the bone? Plse give us examples of people who have suffered because of their membership and/or support for Solution and the employers involved.

  5. @Grenville

    You have outlined a few valid concerns. The response concerning typos is unnecessarily frivolous.

    What are the terms and conditions of the data controller? Can decisions from that office be challenged independently?

    Have you done a comparative to similar provisions in las as it relates to other countries that have successfully implemented?

  6. Hi David:

    Spelling mistakes are normally minor issues that do not affect the interpretation of the Bill. Grammatical errors, that can change the interpretation of the Bill, are very important matters. I did not provide examples of frivolous spelling errors, but grammatical errors. Further, the errors were in the INTERPRETATION section of the Bill. Please do not minimize the seriousness of their incompetence.

    A Data Controller is every single business owner in Barbados who collects/stores information on their clients. That would be every: hairdresser, joiner, painter, professional, etc. Even you, as the Blogmaster, who have persons names and/or IP addresses, are a Data Controller.

    All Data Controllers, including yourself, will be required to register with the politically appointed Commissioner, or face a fine of $10,000 or 2 months imprisonment, or both. It will be mandatory – including for you. You may wonder why the traditional media are not shining any light on the negative aspects of this bill. It seems that they were given a reward for their silence.

    While a warrant can be issued to seize the files and computers of those politically targeted, the act forbids such warrants to be issued on journalists. Perhaps that explains their silence. It also means the end of anonymous journalists. Even if you operate BU out of Barbados, you will need to register because you are collecting the data of Barbadians. Wise up.

    As explained in my last article, the European nations included the EU safeguards to protect their citizens from political abuse. We carefully removed every single safeguard, so we are all exposed – well, all except registered media houses who have only applauded this bill. You can thank the members of the BLP/PPfDD, who shamelessly passed the most dangerous bill to have ever come our of Parliament since our independence.

  7. @Grenville

    You should reread the Blogmaster’s comment. The frivolous reference was made to the reply to your submission about errors.

    This blogmaster will not be registering with any local entit, BU is a hosted blog outside Barbados domain.

  8. Fractured
    I agree! They should have hired Donville given his experience with security ankle bracelets.🤣🤣🤣

  9. It won’t be long before we are required to have an electronic implant, the size of a grain of rice, implanted at the base of our thumbs in order to travel or conduct business. Of course, we will be told that it is a security requirement meant for our own good.

    As long as we are willing to sit idly by as each apparently tiny infraction is made upon our personal freedoms, they will become more and more intrusive until the mark of the beast becomes a reality.

    What under heavens name is the necessity of this requirement that applies to almost every single trader in Barbados? Having been in the forefront of the slave training experiment, have we been again selected as guinea pigs by the IMF (and those who control them) for an experiment in how a government can electronically track, control and trace every single citizen?

    To me, this seems a bridge too far.

  10. Former Commissioner of Police Darwin Dottin and one other former senior government official will have lead responsibility for organizing security …(Quote)

    So what are the police for? We are sleep-walking in to a dictatorship.

  11. Hi David:

    Please be advised that all Data Controllers who have data on Barbadians must register regardless of whether they reside in or outside of Barbados (See section 3.1). Once you are offering a service to Barbadians, you must register.

    Also, if you are not properly maintaining that data, then congratulations David, you are liable to pay a fine of $500,000, or 3 months in HMP Dodds, or both.

    Whether you want to register or not, and whether you want to maintain the data as specified by the Bill (Section 4.1), or not, is inconsequential to the Government. You can like it or lump it, but you will be forced to pay. I suggest that you get very familiar with Section 4.1.

    Also, if you transfer our data to a blacklisted country as per Section 22 (and the Government will not tell you which countries they have blacklisted), then you are liable for an additional $500,000 and HMP Dodds accommodation. Are you getting it yet?

    If you want to stay anonymous, but lie about your identity, well, that is another $500,000 and 3 months holiday for you. You now owe $1.5M and we have not even gotten started.

    When the police come for you, and you do not assist them in providing incriminating evidence against you as per Section 89, then that is another $100,000 fine. Also, if you reveal any personal data on BU, then that is another $100,00 fine.

    Perhaps it will begin to dawn on you and others why this is the most dangerous bill to have ever been passed in our Parliament. Unfortunately, while this was being passed, many were distracted by the partying and they ignored the threat. I recommend that that you reread Solutions Barbados’ last three articles, namely:

    Welcome to our Police State
    Appointing John Wick
    Transparent Incompetence

    Solutions Barbados spent the last 2 months trying to get amendments to to Bill to protect us all. But all we got was opposition from BLP/PPfDD die-hard supporters, whose masters shamelessly passed this most dangerous bill. Wise up.

    • @Grenville

      What about blogmasters domiciled overseas with hosted websites read out of Barbados jurisdiction? Is this something that will be observed in the breach? Something like the tax on online transactions?

      Asking for a friend.

  12. Barbados law enforcement agencies have no power outside its jurisdiction. Power begins and ends at our borders.



    Last week the GoCB made a public statement. Now, we have no dislike for this man.

    However, today was the second time in a week or so that the New York Stock Exchange has lost over 700 points.

    When we analyze what is happening globally – all the forces at work

    These writers, the people who more than 19 months ago forecasted a deep recession. A recession vastly deeper than 2008/9. Why the *uck could we be able to see that and the people with all of their institutional bullshiiiite structures, academies, can’t.

    How could it be possible for the governor of the central bank, any governor of our central bank, to continue with these meaningless memes from a bygone era?

    How could it be so possible for titularly intelligent people to continue to say the same things all others in that position have always said without a hint of a new language?

    Why is it not possible for any cohort in power within Barbados to have the limited vision to see what will undoubtedly come before the end of March 2020?

    There’s no need to be a soothsayer!

    Jesus Christ man! What sense does it make to be small unless you’re at least agile as well.

    Our forecast, which we see mainstream publications are now joined-in on, has serious implications for the Mugabe regime, her BERT and most importantly the people of Barbados.

    But the cool aid drinking elites are yet asleep!

    • @Pacha

      A big part of the problem is that our educated class is not inclined to challenge the status quo. Nobody wants to rock the boat. We are happy to engage in a level of serendipity.

  14. I read the posting about 12.01am but decided not to post. I was going to say that no good would come from this move: I based that conclusion on the fact that we cannot get the present libel laws relaxed and also after hearing a government senator mouthing off about the social media ills and what she wanted do about social media. After reading “nextparty246’s” posting I can see that my concerns were not misplaced. The measures outlined by “nextparty246’s” are draconian in nature and seek to subjugate the populace.

  15. Hi David:

    If you are in an EU state, then the EPA will make our laws enforceable outside of our natural borders. If in CARICOM, then the CSME rules will capture you. If you are in any of the other WTO countries, then the WTO rules will apply. There is no escape, except if you live in one of the 31 non-WTO countries.

    The only reason why we were forced to pass a Data Protection bill was to comply with the EPA – which I previously noted, was the worst trade agreement since our parents were sold for trinkets. Now there can be some reciprocity.

  16. Hi Robert:

    I would have preferred to have had this discussion privately with the Joint Select Committee. We repeatedly requested an opportunity to be heard, but we were not invited. So we wrote our first explicit article: ‘Welcome to our Police State’ to inform our Senators, but they passed the bill.

    So the next week during debate in the House, we wrote ‘Appointing John Wick’ to try to alert our MPs, but they passed it anyway. So we wrote ‘Transparent Incompetence’ to let the GG know that proper process was not followed.

    If this becomes law as is, then we have well-past the point of no return.

  17. Long-term bond rates were eclipsed by short-term rates.

    Meaning that investors are seeking safety in drones – gold, longer term bonds/treasuries etc

    This represents an inversion of the yield curve

    The Fed lowering short term interests rates is unlikely to have any effect. There is not room to maneuver.

    Global financial markets were in free fall for 2 weeks now.

    We’ve crossed a Rubicon!

    Were is the governor of the CB.

    • Trump will be very concerned, he measures his performance based on the trending of the DOW. Go figure.

  18. @ Pacha

    Good points! The inverted yield curve caught many by surprise. With interest rates already so low the Fed has no bullets left.

    Just today Denmark’s biggest bank introduced negative interest rate mortgages -the first in the world.

    The Bdos govt is way off the pace and using an outdated playbook. I thought the fake prof Avi was supposed to be a well heeled financial guru?

    BERT is dead in the water!

    The next crash will make 2008/09 look like happy days. The markets are due a massive correction after a decade of debt accumulation driven by central banks keeping rates at near 0%.

  19. Dullard

    We still can’t understand why policymakers in Barbados are not running around as though their hair is on fire.

    And things in Barbados real hard already – not only Barbados.

    But to have a governor of the CBoB who only last week was telling us some nonsense which has no relevance today and will have less when this shiiite hits the fan, more fully.

    You are quite right, BERT is dead in the water. And if BERT is dead the next election could be another 30 – 0 in reverse.

    And if this reasoning holds it will be like under the recent DLP regime or worse between now and then.

  20. David

    These matters should be beyond the remit of anybody other than the highest government officials.

    Especially, when we need to stop being historical and contemporary and make estimations about what will happen in the future.

    • @Pacha

      Yes ,however if the principals are not reading from the correct script others in civil society must boot them in the ass.

  21. For your information.

    While the Data Protection bill does not allow a person to have copies of seized documents, it is interesting to note that thiswas allowed in the recently debated Customs Act, Cap 66.

    Section 209A

    “2. Where a proper officer takes possession of a document under subsection (1), he shall, at the request of the person otherwise entitled to the document, provide that person with a copy of the document certified under the seal of the Customs and Excise Department as a true copy.”

    “3. Notwithstanding any other law, a copy certified in accordance with subsection (2) is admissible in evidence in a court as if the copy were the original document.”

  22. As previously noted, Pachamama regularly predicts the imminent demise of the American Empire.

    At the moment, he is predicting an imminent recession because the yield curve, which describes the interest rates charged for bonds of different maturities, is inverted.

    Let me go on the record to contradict Pachamama. There will be no recession this year or next, not least because the Open Market Committee of the U.S. Federal Reserve Board will lower interest rates as often as necessary to keep the U.S. out of a recession.

    It is an established practice for the Fed to do what it takes to ensure macroeconomic stability in an election year — so as not to tip the scales heavily in favour of either the incumbent party or its main opposition.

    All we are seeing in the U.S. stock market at the moment is some of the turbulence that often happens in the summer months of July and August when a great deal of money is parked in the sidelines until the Fall.

    Incidentally, I’m surprised the blog master has not broadcast the announcement today that Hilary Beckles has secured reparations in the amount of £20 million for UWI from the University of Glasgow.

    Let us hope the money does not disappear without a trace.

  23. No @Dullard, “The inverted yield curve caught” unawares only folks who were not attentive to US financial/ economic news. Bloomberg News in particular was mouthing about the inverted yield curve and all the palaver around that since early last year when many folks noticed the trend lines!

    The fact that key European countries also are currently experiencing similar inverted curves is further notification that those who needed to be alert should really not have been caught off guard!

    Markets have to correct after ever bull (or bear )run …what goes up by basic law of gravity will come down at some point… so the continued harping by the pros that this will correct on X date or Y date is a truism…so big deal really.

    Like all things in life the key here is calling it correctly and balancing your portfolio to make a killing or at least not be killed by what’s falling !

    And finally, Trump has done the US a favor with his perverse way of handling China at al… a reckoning was due and he has simply speeded that up basically .

  24. The government has a right to as much information as possible so that it can better monitor and collect indirect taxes. It’s funny: on the one hand people complain about tax losses and tax amnesty, on the other they want bureaucratic data protection that prevents good and fair taxation.

    The same applies to the security apparatus and the protection of citizens against crime.

    It is therefore imperative to free the tax authorities and the security apparatus from all the shackles of data protection.

    Excessive data protection is also a massive barrier to international investment. In principle, I believe that our government should review all laws to make sure they are investment-friendly. All laws that do not meet this standard must be amended or abolished, for example the excessive protection of workers. We need clear priority rules for international investment in Barbados!

  25. Ewart Archer

    We look forward to the insightful arguments made by you and others.

    You argue that the Fed will intervene and lower interest rates further – short term interest rates because the Fed has no control over long term rates.

    However, rates have been so low for so long that the Fed has virtually no leaverage at all. In fact, all CBs are at the end of their rope as far as monetary policy is concerned. And they have very little influence on the fiscal side for reasons we can discuss. More precisely, we are in the era of negative interest rates.

    Mr Archer, recall that recently POTUS fought with the Fed over this very matter. POTUS wanted the lowering of rates to continue into the election year while the Fed wanted to do the opposite and raise rates because of deflationary concerns.

    More fundamentally, we are not persuaded that these measures hold much utility for the real economy in an era of financialization.

    The present DOW is not an accurate measure of the real economy but the result of algorithmic trading, buy-back activity made possible by a decade of cheap money and the dominance of financial assets.

    It is wholly imprecise to describe these market conditions as mere seasonal turbulence. For they are not that in and of themselves. When they are understood though the environments in which they are happening the truism cannot be avoided.

    Capitalism gives us a recession every 7 years on average. The last one being 2008/9. Meaning that we should have had another around 2015/6. Roughly speaking we are now 3 to 4 years late. The laws of averages militate against your reasoning and so are the mainstream media which are only now seeing what’s coming.

    This writer continues to forecast a deep recession, worse than that of 2008/9, by the end of March 2020. And neither the Fed not Trump or anybody else can withstand this force of capitalism.

    • @Pacha

      We must pray the great US does not enter a recession, their ability to practice a QE policy will not be possible. Then again adding trillions more in debt will not make a difference or will it.


      Several links have been posted to BU about the Glasgow deal.

  26. We must pray the great US does not enter a recession, their ability to practice a QE policy will not be possible. Then again adding trillions more in debt will not make a difference or will it. (Quote)

    Is this Bajan economic wisdom or just the usual rum shop nonsense? At what point should a regime introduce QE?

  27. David

    There is always the fail-safe which is now being planned.


    World wars have proved an excellent way to wipe the slate clean and begin again.

    Only that the widespread use of nuclear weapons will be deployed this time.

  28. David

    No, these days we have hybrid warfare and everything is being weaponized!

    It is your ‘civil society’ which is being weaponized in Hong Kong.

    • @Pachamama

      With interests at a low it will be interesting to see the effect QE would have on these developed economies were such to occur. There is good evidence to support a QE strategy might create a lot of blow back. We will have to wait and see. It is Hobson’s choice, what other policy positions are out there?

  29. David

    There is only the end of neoliberal capitalism and the fashioning of a new system. That is the central issue in the new war.

    • @Pacha

      Let us hope so. Artificially trying to control the markets will have its moments.We may be here now.

  30. David

    There no way out!

    That juncture may be delayed but not avoided.

    And the delaying tactics are now subject to diminishing marginal returns.

  31. Pacha

    Not only does the Fed have plenty of room to cut interest rates — typically a quarter point at a time — but it has many other tools for direct credit expansion.

    Trust me. There will be no recession before the November 2020 election.

  32. @ Ewart Archer

    You are right. We have been here before. On August 7, 2007, Ben Bernanke made a mistake by not cutting interest rates. It led in part to turning a financial crisis (housing) in to an economic typhoon. They will not make that mistake again. The Fed is not the Barbados central bank.

  33. Ewart Archer

    In fact the news is that the cut could be as high as 50 basic points, not 25.

    That in itself is an indication of how dire the circumstances are because 25 is the normally expected.

    But deflationary pressures have not gotten any better. And deepening the short term interest rates cuts and extending the length of time make deflation worse. Deflation is more dangerous than inflation in these circumstances.

    This means the Fed is essentially responding to political pressures, not purely economic conditions.

    Lastly, we suspect that we’re much nearer to these events than most. So unless you’re on the Board we have no reason to trust your judgement. And even if you were, our own judgement would be undeniable we find.

  34. Hal Austin

    Is a Focking idiot.

    This is not 2007 all the environments are different today.

    In any event interest rates were not the primary causal reason for the housing crisis and the event that followed.

  35. Tron:

    No one is against a Data Privacy law. The problem is that the Government passed a Bill that does the complete opposite – it guarantees data leaks. As you have confirmed, the aim of the Bill was to access the information held by the private sector for tax evasion purposes. However, once the data is leaked to the political party, it can be abused.

    The Europeans have safeguards to prevent that type of abuse. The BLP/PPfDD took every one of those safeguards out of our Bill. Why Tron? For what possible reason?

    If the Government was actually concerned about privacy, then they could have written a bill that defined personal data, and then stated that sharing or selling a person’s personal data, without their consent, is an offence which entitles a victim to damages. The victim could then quantify their loss of business and/or reputation, and a judge can determine what is valid, and award damages accordingly. Instead, we have a 102-page complicated bill that seems to be designed to confuse the public.

  36. I fall squarely on Pacha’s side minus the rhetoric on neo-liberal and war.
    The levers available are few. Savings have exceeded investment in many significant markets. And for some time. Dropping short term rates by even 100 points will not reverse this. The bond market globally is more than double the equity, and at last count 28% of bonds were in the 0%-negative yield.

  37. @ nextparty246 August 15, 2019 11:27 AM
    “If the Government was actually concerned about privacy, then they could have written a bill that defined personal data, and then stated that sharing or selling a person’s personal data, without their consent, is an offence which entitles a victim to damages. The victim could then quantify their loss of business and/or reputation, and a judge can determine what is valid, and award damages accordingly. Instead, we have a 102-page complicated bill that seems to be designed to confuse the public.”

    Your ‘succinct’ assessment is a constructively fair and balanced critique of this Bill of Abject Confusion.

    A bill riddle with legalistic gobbledegook to confuse even the smartest lawyer and purely designed to create another minefield of controversy to produce unjustified legal fees to feed the financial hunger of a fast-becoming irrelevant fraternity.

    Since this piece of legislation has the obvious potential to affect the ‘ordinary’ man and woman called Joe &Jane Blogs why couldn’t the language be more ‘crystal clear’ to make it user-friendly to a more IT literate population?

    In the final analysis, you GP11, should seek an opinion from a legal expert- like the real professor Jeff Cumberbatch- on the Constitutional integrity on such an invasively pernicious piece of convoluted legislation.

  38. We have laws that were copied almost word for word and not enforced,

    Now we see the creation of laws that are riddled with “errors”. Enforcement of these new laws will cause a great cry of pain. Is this the proverbial slippery slope, where we move from bad to worse?

    It is amazing that at every bite of the apple we seem to get it wrong… some will suffer

  39. Great job Grenville in ventilating this matter in such a thorough manner.

    I am glad that you did not do a hit and run job and instead provided a detailed summary/description of this bad law.

    It is amazing at the number of people who would/are willing to ignore the canary in the mine.

    Keep up the good work.

  40. @ nextparty246 August 15, 2019 11:27 AM

    Minor editorial errors are normal even in great legislative projects. It has always been that way, it will always be that way.

    I am sure that our Honourable Prime Minister has selected great experts for this daunting task and that the judiciary can correct any remaining errors.

    So there is no reason for alarmism.

    Those who trust the government trust democracy.

  41. Tron:

    These are not minor editorial errors, but the most dangerous (to the public) bill ever to have been passed by our parliament since our Independence. You cannot be that uninformed.

    Further, unless there is a change in the trend, the PM does not have any experts to draw from. There is only those most loyal party supporters, who tend to be the least competent. Why? Because they know that they will be appointed to positions, so there is no need for them to attend to their professional competence.

    The evidence is in our poorly drafted Bills, our poorly managed public services, the poorly managed judiciary, and the poorly managed national economy. Barbados deserves a PM that will use all of the resources of our nation, not just the extremely loyal supporters.

  42. Hants:

    It applied to all businesses, local and foreign owned, and local or foreign based, that collects data of Barbadians. They will all have to register. It seems to be a Bill to make everyone guilty. Then the political party can decide who survives. So, businesses will either have to get with the party’s program, or pay their $1.5M fine – which almost every business can easily attract.

  43. TheO:

    I write one article each week. If I am writing during a busy hurricane season, then I may not be in Barbados (I am normally on the first military transport to the devastated country). Internet access is normally very limited. Nevertheless, I try to get the article out, but I normally do not get enough Internet access to monitor or respond to comments. Hence, the necessary ‘hit and run’.

  44. @Grenville,
    It was not meant to be a criticism, but was to be complimentary of your thorough discussion of this important item.

    I can understand a lawyer making grammatical and typographical errors, but would be hesitant to make use of the services of such a lawyer. But an ambiguous/flawed law is frightening.

    I can imagine a person’s surprise at getting caught in an unexpected technicality by such a law, Hopefully , the judge has more ‘ sense’ than the lawmakers.

    It would be interesting to have a comment from Dean Cumberbatch.

  45. Northern O

    Seems like yours is the definitive, critical word!

    And so should it be.

    On the issue of a WW3 scenario as an instrument to destroy then rebuild thus recreating value by wiping out unrepayable debt, permit us to demure at this time thus leaving space to savour a small victory of ideas.

  46. I concur with you, hence I cannot be definitive.
    The concept of sovereign debt, loans without collateral, is an aberration. Even the newer lenders, China, understand you lend for a specific project, and if payments cease, they now own that project/asset.
    WW3 wipes out a lot more than debt?

  47. definitive

    (of a conclusion or agreement) done or reached decisively and with authority.
    “a definitive diagnosis”
    conclusive · final · ultimate · decisive · unconditional · unqualified · absolute · [more]
    (of a postage stamp) for general use and typically of standard design, not special or commemorative.
    a definitive postage stamp.
    “low-value British definitives simply have a portrait of the reigning monarch”
    More definitions, origin and translations

Leave a comment, join the discussion.