Rock Hall Solid as a Rock

Posted as a comment by Artax to Successive Governments Turn Blind Eye to Squatters at Grantley Adams International Airport

What is the latest information on the squatters at Rock Hall?

Or, as is usual with certain issues in Barbados, after all the furor and condemnation, it seems as though people have forgotten about the “Rock Hall squatters” …………. and apparently the issue has become a “nine day wonder?”

I understand a few weeks ago, government officials visited Rock Hall, took certain information from some of the squatters, and offered to sell them land somewhere in St. George. I also heard the illegal non-nationals ran away when the officials arrived, but returned after they left to ask what occurred.

Has anything been done to regularize the status of those illegal non-nationals who have illegally occupied land at Rock Hall and built houses there?

Or, since they continue to break the law by residing in Barbados and occupying land illegally, will they be deported?

Has government begun to the disburse the $25,000 Mottley promised the squatters and will the illegal non-nationals be eligible to receive the money?

195 comments

  • You should be the very last commenter on BU to demonstrate concern about how a government treats the Haitians.

    Like

  • David certainly u cannot be adressing your comment to me
    David Commisiong once made an opportunistic political decision to bring Haitains to barbados and it back fired in his face
    Every one knew that Commisiong reason was not built on compassion but a need for finding low paid slave workers who could be used as farm workers principally placing in these Haitians in agriculture jobs barbadians refuse to do

    Like

  • Another “jesus” moment
    I wonder if govt will be paying the psychiatric inmates when they are being asked by the SSA to do the work of removing garbage from the street.
    Sounds like another jack up.policy by a govt not knowning head from tail

    Like

  • “Prescod said the additional help would include former patients of the Psychiatric Hospital as well as former convicts who served time in prison. He disclosed that inmates at Dodds were currently repairing some SSA equipment.”

    Seems a very progressive policy aimed at helping marginalised groups; however, I don’t see the word inmate or any synonym of inmate in that extract from Barbados Today. More disinformation?

    Like

  • enuff

    is that another word for cheap labour-lol

    Like

  • Greene
    Flexible labour.🤣🤣🤣

    Like

  • The blogmaster agrees we are operating in time that require non standard approaches. Keeping an open mind is key.

    Like

  • @ Enuff October 5, 2019 9:29 AM

    We have no objection to the enfranchising of those groups who have been treated over the years in the labour market as persona non grata; for example, those convicted for the handling of vegetable matter called Cannabis.

    However, this token gesture of affirmative action must not come at cost of exploiting these vulnerable people to satisfy the manpower cost reduction targets as demanded by some fiscal Lord called BERT.

    There should be No cheap labour hiring practices, imported or otherwise, to decimate the unions.

    What we would like both you and your BLP administration principals to admit to the country is that the SSA along with the TB and BWA have been placed on the Privatization auction block and are just awaiting some bidders with foreign money to start the divestment ball rolling.

    How else would the country meet its long overdue foreign debt obligations?

    Like

  • Miller
    But no one was sent home from SSA under BERT according to what I read in the newspaper. Per Mr. Pan Africa, persons retired and now are on “leave” and the marginalised are being hired to help when there’s a shortage. Do you support hiring full-time staff, with such a severe shortage of trucks? Re forex, lmao yuh fishing.🤣🤣🤣

    Like

  • The question still remains will these ” former inmates ” be paid
    Will they be allowed to join Unions

    Like

  • @ Enuff October 5, 2019 4:51 PM

    It is noticed with deep concern your purposeful avoidance of the Privatization thingie.

    Why would there be a concerted programme of hiring permanent staff to replace those lost through natural attrition when big privatization plans are in store for the SSA and BWA with the add-on user charges on the water bills a foretaste of things in the pipeline?

    Why pay such relatively high user charges for sub-standard services under the direct control of politicians and their lackey bureaucrats and a toothless FTC?

    Aren’t the above-mentioned statutory corporations high on the agenda of the BERT-constructed list of those commercial SOEs up for restructuring aka divestment under the 3rd and 4th phases of trying to meet the said BERT targets before the country can have access to future draw-downs of forex so it can continue to import high-end luxury vehicles, stale water in plastic bottles and rancid coconut water from S.E. Asia?

    Like

  • The Nation is also reporting about this and from the article the Minister is speaking about current patients at the Psychiatric Hospital. I suppose calling them “marginalized workers” removes any ethical concerns that people may have.

    https://www.nationnews.com/nationnews/news/242081/ssa-reaches

    Like

  • SARG
    they would have to be out patients

    Like

  • Ex/out patients and ex prisoners working as day laborers where they are given work only when it is available

    Like

  • Miller
    How do you expect me to comment about privatisation when I am not part of, or privy to, government plans? I read stuff in the news like everyone else.

    Sarg
    The marginalisation of former prisoners and people with psychiatric issues is known. I don’t think anyone has to ascribe such to them simply to “remove any ethical concerns”. In any event what “ethical concerns”, paying people to work?

    Like

  • @Enuff

    I was referring to the content in the two articles which implied that the Minister was speaking about people currently housed as patients in the psychiatric hospital, If the Minister is speaking of out patients I have no complaint, however I expect him or any Minister to exercise some clarity in their comments.

    Liked by 1 person

  • How is it that the SSA is supposedly understaff when they are workers who report for work as early as 6:30 a.m and leave their regular “liming” spot in Wildey around 11:30 – 1:00 p.m. daily; without driving a stroke, but are paid. It is said, this daily liming by some staff is due to the shortage of trucks.

    Some of these said SSA workers are uncontrollable as it is, some of them are in and out of prison. How will these recommended groups be managed under such conditions? Can this decision not pose serious security threats?

    Like

  • Can’t these “limers” fill the void seeing that they are being paid anyway?

    Like

  • This government is suppose to be about rationalization and efficiency. The BWU is a member of the social partnership. What is the blogmaster missing ?

    Like

  • Sarg
    Well two newspapers reported differently, why choose the one that says patients? Come, come do you expect people warded at a psychiatric facility to be recruited to collect garbage? Stupse.

    Like

  • No ! The problem lies with govt putting out hot and sweaty policies without understanding the legal ramifications
    The first story printed said inmates at the Psychiatric hospital
    Notice Presocd did not asked the media for a retraction or apology but revisted the issue ( himself )with words to santize and make ammends for his awful mistake

    Like

  • “David Commisiong once made an opportunistic political decision to bring Haitains to barbados and it back fired in his face.”

    Mariposa, you know your above comment is not TRUE.

    All David Comissiong did was, as Barbados’ Ambassador to CARICOM, announced government’s policy of removing the visa requirement for Haitians travelling here.

    He subsequently said Barbados was forced to reverse its decision to allow free movement of Haitian nationals into the country without a visa because of the “large influx of persons” of Haitian nationality coming from Panama and Chile who were not entitled to work here.

    Like

  • How is it that the govt cant find money to pay SSA workers overtime to keep barbados streets clean but can pay White Oaks millions of dollars to sit on their a.sss and do nothing

    Like

  • Dont know why Haitians would leave Panama or Chile to come to find work in barbados
    Was in Panama recently did not see homeless or beggars in the street
    However the fact remains that the story when unfolded stated that the Haitians who had no means of support financially needed help in order to leave barbados and return to Haiti
    Also as the story dragged on Commisiong and the Haitian govt were addressing the problem

    Like

  • RE: “Don’t know why Haitians would leave Panama or Chile to come to find work in Barbados…. Was in Panama recently did not see homeless or beggars in the street….”

    What does you being in Panama (if true) have to do with you not seeing “homeless or beggars in the street” and Haitian leaving Panama and Chile and coming to Barbados looking for work?

    Or are you suggesting if you had seen any homeless people or beggars they would have to be Haitians?

    You have demonstrated your ignorance by making that silly comment, in which you shamelessly made a stereotypical depiction of Haitians as homeless people and beggars.

    Like

  • Any one who have demostrated your lack of comprehension is yu jac.a.ss not seeing any homeless or beggars can be applied to any country who invest in their social enviroment where it serves the best interest of country
    Leave it to you to distort and twist and turn people comments toyour liking with your f up mind
    You a re a fuh real blp yardfowl fuh trute
    Yes i visited Panama recently maybe instead if u living in a bubble two steps behind maybe you should step out and see a bigger picture

    Like

  • The progress in Dominica has been significant. Rebuilding houses, flood mitigation, the cleaning up of the country, and shoring up for the next possible hurricane or heavy rains has made a positive impact.

    According to Maloney, “There’s a lot more to do. Dominica is only a country of 70 thousand people. It’s a relatively small economy but it’s quite a large island. You can see there is a significant difference between when the hurricane hit and today”.

    After being the first into the fray and two years into the trial, Mark Maloney asserts that, “Our group of companies are committed to helping when people are in a time of need. The Rock Hard Cares Foundation exists to help countries around the Caribbean. We’re not going in and putting a plaster on a sore. We go in assessing the situation and really working to put sustainable measures in place to restore for long term benefit”.

    This article is sponsored by Preconco/Rock Hard Cement.

    Like

  • No comment on the work being done by Mark Maloney in Dominica ?

    ” Now is the era of designing for high wind intensity and flood mitigation. For Maloney, “We need to have injection wells for our road infrastructure. Because the Caribbean is developing and properties are turning into hotels and homes, it means that all of that water is being transferred into the road networks. That’s why we get flooding because the land isn’t absorbing water anymore”.

    Like

  • “DonnaOctober 3, 2019 6:58 PM

    Miller,

    My mother immigrated by invitation. I am a Barbadian by descent, status in order. I cannot answer for other Barbadians who break the immigration laws of other countries.. I have never complained if they are deported”

    Cannot believe you wrote that. So why are you opposed to Mr Trump doing what he was elected to do?

    Like

  • Someone who cannot write at least two proper sentences in any contribution, butcher the English language and cannot spell…..has the audacity to tell anyone about “lack of comprehension?

    What does “any country who invest in their social enviroment (environment) where it serves the best interest of country” have to do with Haitians leaving Panama and Chile and coming to Barbados to find work.

    I believe you looked into a mirror just before you wrote “jac.a.ss” and “f up mind.”

    Please explain how asking you a few simple questions makes me “a fuh real blp yardfowl fuh trute?

    You habitually post LIES to this forum, so why should anyone believe you visited Panama recently?

    If, in your opinion, visiting Panama is “stepping out to see a bigger picture,” then you’re the one who’s “living in a bubble two steps behind.”

    Like

  • David BU

    There is an article on page 3A in today’s “Sunday Sun” in which it was mentioned that “more than 20 houses in the controversial Rock Hall squatter community in St. Philip now have Town and Country Planning removal notices.”

    “The notices take effect on November 13 and give those involved two weeks from that date to remove their houses and all building material from the land, plus leave the land the way it was before the structure was built.”

    A woman who identified herself as a JAMAICAN national is reported as having said “Where is the land Mia talked about? She needs to sort that out for us because those notices do not give us enough time to move.”

    She also said it took her two months and $5,000 to build her home, which she has been in for three years.

    My question to her would be why did she leave Jamaica to come to Barbados and ILLEGALLY occupy land that she KNOWS is NOT hers, build a house without T&CP permission, which is also illegal……..

    …….. and now wants the government of Barbados to give her time to move and land as her REWARD for BREAKING the LAW?

    Like

  • I suggest she stays put if she is asking for time
    In the meanwhile govt would be force to use the court for guidance which would give the squatters more time to seek legal resolution
    Also international laws built on humanatarian rights give guidlines and direction which are sufficiently put in place for squatters to seek relief

    Like

  • @Artax

    The other question is as important. Why did our authorities allow the squatter’s village to take root? Allow them to grow families? There is enough blame to go around.

    Like

  • Artax

    The other question is as important. Why did our authorities allow the squatter’s village to take root? Allow them to grow families? There is enough blame to go around.

    Answer

    For the lack of vision the people suffer

    Like

  • David BU

    It seems as though the squatters were given notices on three previous occasions.

    So, yes, “there IS enough blame to go around,” because this problem spans both BLP and DLP administrations.

    But you also have to take into consideration that, as reported in the March 19, 2017 edition of the “Daily Nation,” Land was being SOLD and LEASED and houses being RENTED at between $50 and $75 a week.

    This meant people sold land that was not legally theirs in the first place, to other people, who will now want to claim land they DO NOT have any LEGAL RIGHT to claim.

    In this case, is government responsible for compensating those individuals who purchased “land” at Rock Hall or offer them “house spots?”

    And what about the people who are renting? Is government responsible for providing them with NHC units?

    Should any of these individuals be eligible for the proposed $25,000?

    Another important question is what about the rights of the legal owners of this land?

    Like

  • @Artax

    Government is always the solution of last resort. These people have children born in Barbados. How is this different to government bailing Clico policyholders for buying products at a time the regulator knew the company was under stress?

    Like

  • David BU

    What about the LEGAL STATUS of their parents?

    The message you’re sending is “Come to Barbados, remain as long as you please, squat on other people’s property, get a few children……. and government will be forced to provide you with house and land.”

    Like

  • @Artax

    The message this blogmaster is sending – the authorities must do their damn work including the politicians.

    Like

  • The squatters are breaking the law but what is the solution that is manageable ?

    The Minister of Housing is reported to have said …..

    ” He noted there was an NHC waiting list for Barbadians seeking housing, but the country’s housing stock was “depleted”.

    https://www.nationnews.com/nationnews/news/211795/fix-housing-mess

    Like

  • How can people who are in Barbados illegally have children who are legally born in Barbados? Even the British and Americans are getting rid of this nonsense. Place of birth is no guarantee of citizenship.

    Like

  • To rep[eat for the hardheads on the blog, some of the squatters are Bajans.

    Like

  • Their is plenty legalities tied into this issue which gives squatters a right to pursue justice
    Govt cannot just send last minute notices asking for squatters to move
    The pursuit of justice is also based on humantarian law
    This issue does not revolve around one individual but hundreds of families which include children and elderly be them citizens of Barbados or citizens of other Caricom nations
    As usual like all social problems in Barbados the horse bolted and there is no one to catch the horse

    Like

  • The following excerpt was taken from the March 22, 2013 edition of the “Daily Nation.”

    “BACK in 2007 Government made a big hullabaloo about the squatters at Rock Hall, St Phillip. Thirty-four of them were served enforcement notices and the then Prime Minister Owen Arthur, in a tough-talking speech to the country, was adamant that the 100 squatters who were in the vicinity of Grantley Adams International Airport “must go.”

    “He said they were affecting the underground water supply and aircraft safety at the airport and that he had given the Chief Town Planner the green light to take enforcement action against the squatters.

    “But six years later (2013) the squatters are still there and the community has almost doubled the 100 number and expanded their “territory” to as far as Gemswick (formerly Pennyhole) – an area directly facing the airport.”

    “What is also amazing about the situation, according to some of the squatters, is that both “the Democratic Labour Party and the Barbados Labour Party (BLP) were busy canvassing the area last election, holding spot meetings and distributing circulars.”

    Liked by 1 person

  • ” The majority of the workers, who are from St Vincent and the Grenadines and Guyana, said this was not what they signed up for.”

    https://www.nationnews.com/nationnews/news/241950/jada-workers-stage-protests-sites

    Like

  • Squatting is as Bajan as cou-cou. There are multiple explanations why the relevant authorities do NOTHING, which will alter the situation.

    The Chief Town Planner is constrained by Section 25 (8) of the Act
    from enforcing an order where it will result in displacement of persons
    and where there is no other accommodation suitable to the
    reasonable requirements of those persons. Therefore, before any
    enforcement activity takes place the Chief Town Planner must be
    assured that the persons whose homes are to be demolished have
    someplace to which they can relocate.

     The law also limits the Chief Town Planner to a four (4) year period
    starting from the date of commencement of any development within
    which to issue an Enforcement Notice. This means that if the Town
    Planning Department does not issue the Enforcement Notice within
    four (4) years of the erection of any illegal structure the law does not
    allow it to do so after this period. It should be noted that a large
    number of persons have been squatting for in excess of four years.

    The squatters have been assisted by various Government agencies. For
    example, the National Petroleum Corporation facilitates the provision of
    water to residents of the Belle. The Ministry of Social Transformation
    provided upgrades to housing units and the Ministry of Health provided
    upgrades to toilet facilities.

    In addition, these persons Squatters) can claim
    adverse possession(11) of a statutory corporation‟s land after ten
    (10) years of continuous occupancy and, likewise, in the case of
    Crown Lands, after thirty (30) years according to the 1997
    Limitations of Actions CAP 231. In this regard, the squatters would
    also be acquiring Government lands without making any payment. (all from AG Reports)

    Liked by 1 person

  • @Northern Observer

    Good comment.

    Like

  • Further more was the land well secured along with signage forbidding trespassing
    How would a person from outside territory knows who or if the land is /in/ was possession
    Justifiable ownership requires fairplay

    Like

  • lol…@ac….all you need know is the land doesn’t belong to you. Trespassing and erecting a permanent structure are not the same thing.

    Imagine. In 1997 at SixMen’s, the GoB acquires several acres of land. They cannot reach agreement on a price. 10 years later, 2007, not a cent has been paid for the land. But, persons have begun building structures, aided and abetted by the construction of a road, with multiple turn-offs, leading to said lands. Somebody has even built a large boat facility. By 2013, it is known at least 170 structures exist upon the lands. By 2018 that number has increased to 200+. By 2027, the original squatters will own the land. Why? We like it so.

    Now I know you never been down George Street. But effin you could reach Panama, tek a trip down to Six Men’s. You could even check out the new hotel. And the fancy beach bar.

    Like

  • charles SkeeteOctober 11, 2019 11:46 AM

    “DonnaOctober 3, 2019 6:58 PM

    Miller,

    My mother immigrated by invitation. I am a Barbadian by descent, status in order. I cannot answer for other Barbadians who break the immigration laws of other countries.. I have never complained if they are deported”

    Cannot believe you wrote that. So why are you opposed to Mr Trump doing what he was elected to do?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    I wonder where you got the idea that I am opposed to people who enter the USA illegally from being deported. My problem is with people who are legally seeking asylum and SMALL CHILDREN WHO HAVE NO CONTROL OVER THEIR WHEREABOUTS being kept in inhumane conditions. My problem is with people fleeing for their lives being demonized and treated like savages. You should also take into consideration that the US of A is guilty of interfering in the politics of these countries from which the majority of the migrants are fleeing and therefore bears some responsibility for conditions there. This is not taking place in a vacuum.

    You will also find that I never opposed Trump’s plan to build his wall. My problem is the narrative he creates around it.

    All this even though we know that the only “Americans” who have a right to be annoyed at others trying to squat on their lands are the Native Americans. I acknowledge that that ship has sailed and there is no going back.

    You are obviously an inhabitant of the alternative reality of Wonderland. My name is not Alice and I avoid rabbit holes.

    Like

  • N O
    I feel safer in Panama than going down the country side of barbados
    Mia promised the people the world so i guess squatters are entitled

    Like

  • “This meant people sold land that was not legally theirs in the first place, to other people, who will now want to claim land they DO NOT have any LEGAL RIGHT to claim”

    Really baffled if this actually took place since from my experience it is easier for a camel to get through a needle’s eye than to sell a land given that requisite searches must be done to ensure that the land is free of all encumbrances before title can be contemplated

    Liked by 1 person

  • “I wonder where you got the idea that I am opposed to people who enter the USA illegally from being deported”

    My apologies

    Like

  • Charles Skeete,

    Re: You are obviously an inhabitant of the alternative reality of Wonderland.

    And I take that back.

    Like

  • Bumbling govt here we go agsin

    Added 15 October 2019

    Print

    Have no fear, the squatters at Rock Hall, St Philip, have been told.

    This message came yesterday from Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley, who said Government remained committed to solving the problem and would do so in a fair, reasonable and humane manner.

    Mottley explained that residents who were served with enforcement notices last week did not need to become anxious, as it was just another step toward a solution.

    The notices, placed on more than 20 houses, take effect on November 13. They gave the squatters two weeks from that date to remove their houses and all building materials from the land, as well as leave the property in the condition it was before the structure was built. (PR/

    Like

  • I say and will say again the country was duped
    This is a lost govt depending on trial ballons to form policy
    What a clueless bunch of retards

    Like

  • Last govt according to the blp was the worst govt
    Who would have belived that a 30-0 govt would be beyond worst
    I got to handed to them they might make it into the Guinness book of World records as the first govt given a 30-0 mandate to squander it
    Unimaginable

    Like

  • After offering the squatters money and housing
    Then allowing town and country to give orders of a thirty day notice to get off the land
    Mia tells the squatters via media ” i got yuh back” dont worry
    This is the most absurd turn of events

    Like

  • “Really baffled if this actually took place since from my experience it is easier for a camel to get through a needle’s eye than to sell a land given that requisite searches must be done to ensure that the land is free of all encumbrances before title can be contemplated…..”

    If you’re going down that line, then you have every right to be baffled.

    Come on, my friend, we’re “talking” about people illegally squatting on land that’s not theirs.

    Sometime ago, it was reported in the media that a Guyanese said while travelling on a bus, he heard people talking about “free land” at Rock Hall. So, he decided to go there, claim land and build his house.

    Were the “requisite searches done to ensure that the land was free of all encumbrances” when people of his ilk went to Rock Hall and claimed “house spots?”

    If a squatter, for whatever reason, decides to sell his/her “house spot” to another squatter, who would conduct the “requisite searches to ensure the “land” was free of all encumbrances before title can be completed?”

    Do you believe lawyers would be involved in these transactions?

    Do you believe someone would apply for a mortgage for house and land in a squatters’ community?

    Liked by 1 person

  • Truly baffling if Mia would undermine the the importance of the letters sent to the squatters by Town and country planning dept
    Somehow Mia does not understand the meaning of good goverance and resorts to hit and sweaty approaches to seek resolution
    This problem needs to be first address by the courts and the depts in charge of land and housing
    But No! Mia rather sticks her big nose into an already complicated situation
    Can somebody please pull this woman and aside and tell her what role she has to undertake as PM

    Like

  • Do you know the message contained in the letters? What is the process the issuing of the letter triggers? The government’s policy is to treat with the squatters humanely and not Trump like. If this government had bulldozed the structures of the squatters you lot would be all over social media braying like JAs.

    Like

  • @ Mariposa

    Mia is the minister, so the chaotic situation lies at her door. The correct procedure, as you have pointed out, is that Town and Country, in cooperation with the legal owners of the property, should have obtained a court order to remove the squatters within a given time. If they failed to move then the bulldozers should clear them off the site.
    The PM, a politician, is playing politics; the PM, a lawyer, appears to be side-lining the courts. Whatever the outcome, she must reform the relevant squatting (adverse possession) legislation. Or, she can make a speech.
    The DLP must speak out.

    Like

  • You continue to demonstrate your high ignorance on the blog. Do you know who owns the land? Is it land of the Crown? Does it matter who the land belogs given the reason for moving the squatters? Who is the minister responsible for Town Planning? It has been discussed ad nauseam that BOTH political parties have allowed the matter to morph. And these matters it is not about right or wrong to clean up because there is only the best way. Do you understand the people at Rock Hall are human beings, some Bajans?

    Like

  • Heard enough of the political slants and blame games
    Present is about finding solutions
    Mia ought to stop sticking her big a.ss in every dept head measures
    Let the process takes course and only if need be for her intervention act accordingly and by law
    This constant undermining of dept measures makes govt look like bumbling fool with the head not knowing where to find foot
    The squatters were given a thirty day time line
    One would figure some might comply others might not
    However the law is there to proceed and process and Mia constant inteferring does nothing to help as with this issue

    Like

  • @ Mariposa

    Here is a trick: just ignore the buffoons, semi-literates and social nuisances who try to tempt you in to unnecessary discussion. Just read them and analyse what they say and you will soon realise those who never say anything positive; those who are the Ninja men and women of the blog; and those who are just mentally disturbed.
    Ignore them. The president is the minister for town and country planning and the problem lies at her door. She makes up policy by the throw of a dice.

    Like

  • You cannot bulldoze the houses with human beings including children you buffoon. The politicians have created the problem now they have to solve it. Squatters are in most cases are the most vulnerable people in the society. In case you forget squatting happens all over the world.

    Like

  • Hal
    Head not brains

    Like

  • Would be interesting to know what ” humanatarian measures Mia would employ to remove the squatters.
    Mia first mistake was giving the squatters a “get out if jail card” with govt offerings of money
    There is no problem having govt intervention assisting squatters places relocate but not at taxpayers expense and within a clear view that some of these squatters had/ have the finiancial wherewithal to build homes on that land

    Like

  • Rules and legal rights on how to evict squatters
    If you already have a squatter, here’s what you could do:
    Call the Police. Act immediately if you discover a squatter by calling the police. …
    Give Notice, and then File an Unlawful Detainer action. …
    Hire the Sheriff to Force the Squatter Out. …
    Legally Handle the Abandoned Personal Property.

    Like

  • At whose expense should be? You are aware the majority of people squatting are the most vulnerable in society?

    Like

  • Also those who were recently unemployed and were part of the work force of barbados
    But should govt toss them an olive branch to secure that the banks does not foreclose on their property
    David i dont think u would agree to such a policy
    Rather than i can hear u saying people ought not to live above their means
    The squatters story although sad should be resolved through the courts and not by govt intervention with a pretence of giving the squatters hope place on a political landscape

    Like

  • @ Mariposa

    The real issue is that after 16 months in government, the nation in crisis, we are debating squatters. The Mottley government has lost its way. It will end in tears.

    Like

  • Squatters is one of many issues being debated. Your hardheadedness is legendary on the blog.

    Like

  • @ David who wrote ” the majority of people squatting are the most vulnerable in society? ”

    Are you sure ?

    No rent, no mortgage, no debt.mmmmmmm

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ Hants

    Are we a nation of laws?

    Like

  • @Hants

    There is a universal reason why people squat.

    Like

  • David refuses to acknowledge the many tens of thousands who are struggling to pay their mortgages and are in danger of foreclosure. These people did the right thing. What is going to be done for them? He also refuses to acknowledge those who are abiding by the law and “scotchig” with relatives in crapped conditions.

    SMH.

    I have no problem with land being rented and loans being offered to Bajan nationals and those with Barbadian children. But…… they MUST BE MADE TO PAY BACK!

    Like

  • Question: Is David BU a traditional Barbadian? Does he understand the nuances of Barbadian culture and the hidden pain of everyday poverty? Does he understand how ordinary people feel when some, including many illegals, jump the queue?

    Like

  • @ David who wrote ” There is a universal reason why people squat ”

    What is the reason ?.

    Like

  • There is no doubt that squatting is a problem.
    However at issue here is whether govt should extend a long arm so long that it stretches into the treasury at tax payers expense
    Where are the laws written in the Constitution that gives a govt the right to extend such a long arm of benevolence to squatters
    Far from it the law is so written that if a judgement is held in favour of squatters they must obeyed the laws put in place by govt and which can give govt agencies in charge of Town and country planning to evict or seize property if not in compliance with the laws of the land while they occupy the land or bulding structure

    Like

  • @Hants

    Affordability.

    We have people whose economic circumstance changes and they have no choice. Others live on the street, live in shelters etc. It is not ideal what is happening but tossing these people on the streets is not the answer. We should be holding the politicians to account.

    This blogmaster can recall growing up in the country and many people, the poor squatted on ‘tenantry’ land. To remind you, there are Bajans squatting at Rock Hall also.

    Like

  • In theory it is nice to have a heart of benevolence for squatters but the reality begs the questions
    Can govt afford that much benevolence in a time of austerity

    Like

  • @ac
    just think of it as supporting the “social economy” and don’t fret about the particulars.
    Back in 2013 and 14, when the crew you support, ran back to back deficits of >$1 BILLION each year, you found solace in explaining to the Blog it was supporting the social economy. The current crew has no access to that kind of money, but a few million here or there, to support the social economy, is a good thing.

    Like

  • “You are aware the majority of people squatting are the most vulnerable in society?”

    David BU

    Yes, there may be cases where some of the squatters “are among the most vulnerable in society.” And that’s why we have agencies such as the Welfare Department, National Assistance Board, Urban and Rural Development Agencies to assist these people.

    Surely you must realize many of these squatters are deliberately flouting the law.

    A similar situation exist when people call on government to build markets, yet they decide to sell in alleys and along the streets of Bridgetown, rather than paying for market space. Take a walk down Cheapside and you would see several vendors selling in front of the Cheapside Market……. many of them without the required permits.

    And the vendors would say they’re “among the most vulnerable in society.”

    How about the PSV operators refusing to use the newly built Constitution River terminal, to instead impede the free flow of traffic, by “picking-up and setting down” passengers by Queen’s Park and on QEH’s pasture.

    Or, as is done by the operators of the Silver Hill mini-vans, don’t go into the terminal at all.

    Every night the operators of routes 10 – Silver Hill and 11 – Silver Sands ZRs block where TB buses enter and exit the Fairchild Street terminal.

    Mini bus and ZR drivers “dragging” and driving in the middle of the road to prevent other motorist from overtaking……… or driving over the speed limit. These guys are law unto themselves. The amazing thing is, we have been grappling with the problems caused by this “mini bus culture” since the early 1980s.

    Then, you have people “setting up shop” every and anywhere along the “ABC Highway,” even at “roundabouts.”

    When challenged, they seem to believe saying “I is a poor black man/woman trying to mek a dollar,” should evoke sympathy and gives them the right to break the law.

    Almost every month there is a case of an unscrupulous lawyer or a building contractor duping a client.

    Travel across Jemmott’s Lane onto Bay Street and you will see scantily dressed young women, predominantly Jamaicans…….. selling “beef.”

    Why apply to the bank or credit union for mortgages or home improvement loans, when you could squat on other people’s properties and be rewarded by government with being relocated or $25,000 for breaking the law?

    Over the years, PSVs, lawyers, building contractors, vendors, squatters, illegal immigrants, hookers….. have created problems that cannot be solved.

    Like

  • If government is willing to assist squatters, what about homeless people and vagrants?

    I recall President and Founder of the Barbados Vagrants and Homeless Society (BVHS), Kemar Saffrey, saying his appeals to the previous administration for assistance fell on deaf ears.

    Well, that was until he received “word” from former Minister of Culture Stephen Lashley that government was hosting CARIFESTA and during that time there was a need to rid Bridgetown of homeless people and vagrants.

    Although not every homeless person is a vagrant, I believe these are among the most vulnerable in society and some sort of assistance should be rendered to them as well.

    Like

  • @Artax

    Yes they are breaking the law, this is not in question. The issue as you alluded the authorities have refused to enforce the law from the get go and this has led to the messy state of affairs we find ourselves. The government is complicit and have to find a moral obligation to assist with a satisfactory resolution. We are discussing the resolution not whether squatting is illegal.

    Like

  • Dear All

    My apologies. I was under the impression we were discussing the legality of squatting, not the morality of poverty or the politics of squatters’ votes.. My mistake.

    Liked by 1 person

  • SirSimpleSimonPresidentForLife

    Nobody is saying that what the squatters are doing is legal. But lemme pla7 a Georgie Porgie and quote a Scripture for ya, you is a Christian right?

    The law was made for (wo)man, and not (wo)man for the law. The Gospel according to Saint Mark, chapter 2, verse 27

    Actually the secular law was also made by man and can be implemented, amended or even ignored by man.

    What the hell is wrong with you people?

    Like

  • SirSimpleSimonPresidentForLife

    @ArtaxOctober 18, 2019 4:05 AM “If government is willing to assist squatters, what about homeless people and vagrants?”

    The people whom we call vagrants are primarily drug addicts. Giving a drug addict a house or a house spot or even cash will do little. First the addict must voluntarily enter treatment, or be forced by the court into treatment.

    The Psychiatric hospital exists to treat people with addictions.

    I pass there nearly every day. The gate is open 24/7.

    Like

  • Here is a PM who was given a 30-0 mandate to govern and still at every opportune time resorts to political gimmicks as a way forward for resolution
    She being a lawyer no one should have to tell Mia that there are laws on the books that must be followed as a guide on how to resolve hardened and stubborn issues as with the squatting issue

    Like

  • SimpleSimonPresidentForLife

    Do you mean the people YOU call vagrants are primarily drug addicts?

    Or did you form that opinion because some drug addicts are known vagrants?

    If not, could you please direct me to the source of your information or statistics that indicates vagrants are primarily drug addicts?

    Liked by 1 person

  • Here is an interesting article that was written by Cecil McCarthy QC.

    “EVERYDAY LAW: Some points on ownership of land.”

    Today I wish to respond to some of the queries that I have received by e-mail over the last ten months. The first question relates to adverse possession and reads: “If you live on a piece of land for ten years without paying rent, would you become owners of the land and house?”

    The above question is not an unfamiliar one. In Barbados the question is asked frequently because there are several examples of people occupying land, very often initially in the context of some family arrangement, for several years without paying rent or without there being a demand for rent.

    Less frequently, cases occur where a person begins to pay rent and the lessor dies and for several years no one comes forward to make a demand for rent. Acquisition of title by adverse possession is based on two principles.

    First, property is a relative concept and possession is the evidence of ownership. Possession of land, therefore, raises a presumption of ownership and gives one a title that is superior to any person other than one who can show a better title.

    Therefore, if the true owner of a piece of land (i.e. the person who has ownership by way of documents of title) is dispossessed by a trespasser or squatter no one can seek possession against the latter other than the paper owner who will be able to prove a better title against him.

    The second principle on which ownership by adverse possession is based is that a person who has a better claim to an estate must assert his claim within an acceptable period from the time when his right accrued.

    If he fails to assert his right within the period his title would be extinguished and the trespasser or squatter in possession will acquire his title. In Barbados, the period within which the true owner must assert his rights is ten years.

    Put in simple language, the owner of land may lose his title to it if a trespasser or squatter takes over possession of the land and treats it as his own for a period of ten years.

    For example, if the squatter in search of land for his chattel house fences a piece of land and moves his chattel house onto the land fully intending to dispossess the true owner, he can acquire a title to the land if the “true owner” does not in some way assert his right to the land within a period of ten years.

    The title of the adverse possessor cannot be challenged once the statutory ten year period has expired. It is important to demonstrate that the possession is adverse to the true owner.

    For example, a person who enters possession on the basis of a licence or some form of family arrangement will not be able to establish a possessory title since the basis of the occupation of the land is the consent of the owner.

    It is, therefore, not easy to establish title by adverse possession where the person claiming title is a relative of the paper owner. A tenant cannot claim adverse possession against his landlord since the tenant would have occupied the premises with the consent of the landlord and therefore, his possession of the property would not have been hostile or an assertion of a claim of right.

    To answer the question posed, it depends on the circumstances in which you assume possession of the property.

    If you enter as a trespasser or a squatter you can claim title by adverse possession. If you have entered with the permission of the owner you cannot.

    To establish a claim by adverse possession you must show either:

    A discontinuance of possession by the “true owner” followed by possession by the adverse possessor; or:
    Dispossession by the adverse possessor. Dispossession occurs where the adverse possessor comes in and drives out the owner; while discontinuance of possession is the abandonment of possession by the owner.

    In addition to proving possession, a person claiming title by adverse possession must show an intention to possess the land to the exclusion of all other persons, including the owner.

    Whether a person can establish sufficient possession is a question of fact to be determined in each individual case.

    For sure, a claimant must show a degree of physical control of the land.

    Like

  • ” What should be even more disconcerting to Barbadians is the political response to these concerns since 2007. Then Prime Minister Arthur accepted Government responsibility for the situation in so far as it threatened aircraft travel.

    He stated, “Government would be culpable if we are aware that development is taking place that can put safety in the air at peril and do nothing about it.”

    On the question of the contamination of the water supply, a senior Health Official remarked that, “We would have spoken to both administrations … but our concerns were ignored and we believe it was due to politics.”

    !2 years later ?

    Liked by 1 person

  • The saga continues as Mia utterances had more fuel to the already raging fire

    Some Rock Hall residents meeting last night to discuss their situation.
    Fear and confusion continue to grip squatters in Rock Hall, St Philip, even after Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley’s assurances this week.

    Yesterday, huddled in the darkness of the evening, scores of those residing illegally in the area vented their frustrations at the continuing saga since the Town and Country Development Planning Office placed the notices on more than 20 homes. The notices to move take effect on November 13, giving the owners two weeks to remove the structures and clear the land.

    About 300 illegal structures are estimated to be on the site. Authorities have said they are a threat to aircraft.

    Mottley has tried to quell the fears of the residents by pointing out that the notices were a necessary part of the process which would allow Government to legally acquire the land at Rock Hall.

    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 )

Connecting to %s