Miss Ram and Karma Meet

The issue is, how can the Court decide, there is NO SERIOUS ISSUE to be heard? The government only comes into play because they were the acquirers, and a politician, Dale Marshall, spoke to the matter. When this story broke in March, I fully expected a court challenge. The news it has been declined is beyond belief. It is one thing to hear the case and have a result, another entirely to find “no serious issue to be tried”.

Northern Observer

It is fair to disclose our hand on the subject of Miss Ram. The way she has done business in Barbados over the years does not recommend her to this blogmaster. She has generously donated to both major political parties i.e. BLP and DLP. Her training as a lawyer allowed her to grease the system for the benefit of all.

However it will not prevent the BU household from creating blog space to invite opinions on the matter at hand. Government has moved full steam ahead to acquire the property known as Liquidation Centre owned by Ms Ram on Lower Bay Street to facilitate the construction of the Hyatt Hotel.

For years she has operated businesses in Barbados with questionable working working conditions. Hundreds of words can be posted about Furniture Limited. There is an instant in 2012 it failed a health inspection and was forced to suspend operations.

For years Ms Ram was allowed by authorities to operate a hardware cum retail Store on Lower Broad Street. It was a common sight to observe forklifts, 10 wheelers and other heavy duty vehicles loading and offloading items to support the business. The fact that it was an inconvenience to pedestrians and vehicular traffic in the area seemed inconsequential.

The preamble notwithstanding it is important government treats with citizens fairly. The issue at hand is that government and Ms Ram have been unable to reach an agreement on a price for the property where the Liquidation Centre is located. The inability of the parties to reach agreement has prevented the mobilization of the Hyatt project. She sought injunctive relief from the High Court last weekend and to quote a local press report:

In response, the owners sought injunctive relief through the High Court, which dismissed the application on the basis that there was no serious issue to be tried. The company then sought a stay of execution, which the court also rejected.

Some are arguing that government has no bone in the fight between Ms Ram and the Hyatt developer. The Land Acquisition Act  Section 5 (1) 3 is very clear:

Nothing in this section shall be deemed to prevent the acquisitions of lands for public purposes by private treaty.

However the other side to the debate is that the Lower Bay Street area has been included in government’s redevelopment plan and others businesses previously located on the strip north of the Liquidation Centre have vacated.

As it stands the police and government have taken control of the property. The country waits to see if the warehouse will be razed or whether Ms Ram will do what she has been adept at through then years; litigation.

#karma

266 comments

  • @David.

    I have to agree with you that to say there Is nothing to discuss further without meeting to discuss other matters is troubling.

    Also the valuation being based according to Mrs Ram, on a St Lucy property I don’t see the relevance of.

    Is the government using the laws of compulsory acquisition to act as a real estate facilitator here? Also have issues of stock losses and relocation cost been factored into the offer price?

    Mrs Ram is not my favourite business person I will admit, however she still deserves a fair shake under our legal system. The need to “rush” this sale must not supersede the right to a complete and fair legal hearing for all parties involved.

    Liked by 2 people

  • ” I will repay” saith The Lord!”

    She has shown the winds of disharmony and dishonesty and disdain FOR YEARS.

    At no time during those years did she have any charitable spirit towards or kindness for the poor black man and woman that she sold substandard merchandise to.

    With regard to her legal matters, TOUGH SHY$E!

    Not one RH going happy case dere is a new sheriff in town

    Her litigation however WILL BRING SOME BENEFITS TO THE SAME BAJANS THAT SHE HAS DISCOMFITTED OVER THE YEARS BECAUSE IT WILL SHOW BAJANS, like the English ladies that Hats Pain and Teets Marshall discommode of dem land, the steps to take to get back what is hers.

    Now, what she should do now is look to get a class action act against the government for ALL DE LAND MATTERS WHER GOVERNMENT UNFAIR LAND OWNERS.

    TEK SHE MONER AND CREATE SOME GOODWILL by fighting for others who, lost their property, like she has.

    Hire de ole man and leh me and de grandson wuk pun you virtual campaign.

    SO MUCH FOR WISHFUL THINKING

    heheheheh

    Like

  • Yes Mrs. Ram was bitc..h slapped by govt
    However political emotion does not make a wrong right
    This issue is not whether Mrs.Ram was a vile person and deserving of hatred
    The issue resolves around a govt who believes it has every right to stomp and trample on peoples Constitutional rights
    When the voices of those who know better go in concert with a wrong
    The whole of society fails
    Those who knows the Constitution and its bearing on eminent domain by govt would realize that the rule of law does not give govt a right to take private property by way of the treasury and transfer the property over to a private business entity for personnel use
    This is a rogue govt which needs to be removed with haste

    Btw pieces where is Atherley voice on this blatant miscarriage of justice

    Like

  • So Ms. Ram’s businesses have questionable working conditions and the GOB has questionable validity!!

    I suspect she will get what she wants!!

    Like

  • SirSimpleSimonPresidentForLife

    The state, the government, has EMINENT DOMAIN.

    Like

  • As I wrote before what mechanism exists for a meeting of the minds if the two parties can’t agree on a price? If the Gov’t gets to say “this is our valuation, our price is final take it or leave it” what recourse does the other party have?

    Ms. Ram wont garner any sympathy from Bajans, today it is her turn, but tomorrow it may be yours if the Gov’t decides that your property is best suited for other purposes.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ Sargeant

    I was looking and Mariposa’s comments and laughing as I said here she is talking boy the rule of law when her demons exerted the very same wickedness and this one here IN TERMS OF BREAKING LAWS AND DISADVANTAGING PEOPLE.

    “TODAY FOR YOU TOMORROW FOR ME” IS ALL WELL AND GOOD but I got mine long time ago and still under that Rule of Law as defined by both sets of Demons.

    But I serve a powerful God who does not sleep.

    And who WILL REPAY, watch and see

    Like

  • @ Mariposa

    Your DLP government was simply the worst government this country has ever had.

    If Bishop Atherley personally does not rise to the occasion THERE WILL COME ANOTHER!

    You cannot see what is happening AND NEITHER CAN MUGABE.

    WUNNA FEEL dat you both are in control but you will see.

    “BE STILL AND KNOW THAT I AM GOD” was not said to, or of, Reverend Atherley or Mugabe Mottley

    Watch!!!

    Like

  • Private treaty is not compulsory acquisition.
    Eminent Domain is about acquiring land for PUBLIC use.
    What is occurring is the Government is using its power of compulsory acquisition to settle a dispute between two LOCAL Corporations. The buyer (Hyatt developer), and the seller (Mirchandani) could not reach agreement. And then the Government stepped in.
    I appreciate Bajans are ‘fed up’, need ‘economic activity’, Mrs Ram is not an island favourite, and thus Karma is a fair term to use.
    Conversely, the developers are not idiots. Anytime a major project is unveiled, you know surrounding land values WILL move. If instead of Hyatt, the project was a pig farm, properties like the Mirchandani property would decrease in value. If the values will likely go up based on intended use, you acquire what land you require BEFORE unveiling.
    So what happened? What factors caused the developers to require “more land”, and hence need the Mirchandani property?
    The precedent being set here is very dangerous. It opens the door in future, for all manners of abuse.
    As recently as tonight the PM reminded all Barbadians, and whatever investors were watching, that Barbados is a nation of laws. I wonder exactly what she meant?

    Liked by 2 people

  • @Northern Observer

    Can you blame the PM for the decision handed by the Court last weekend?

    Have properties on the strip north of liquidation centre acquired as part of Bridgetown redevelopment?

    Like

  • Hyatt Ziva may be a USD $175Million direct investment but it is not in the clear yet as it relates to permissions.
    And as such, transparency is the byword of developers and architects as they seek to bring the Hyatt Ziva to Barbados.
    To this end as they work to have full disclosure with the public, tonight at the public presentation at Copacabana in Bridgetown, developer Mark Maloney confirmed that planning permission has not been granted as yet. However, even at this early stage, he stressed that the intention is to give the public the details to better inform them as the phases unfold.
    Planning Consultant and Attorney Derick Oderson chaired the meeting and added that the current status of the project entails completed studies and submissions which were used to inform the new design.
    Noting that the Ziva will have an 18-storey building included in its new design, Maloney clarified that contrary to the belief that the edifice will block out much of the beach view, he compared the height of the proposed building to the Central Bank. He said that persons need not confuse “storeys and floors”. He said regardless of the fact that the building will be 18 storeys tall it will only be 20 feet taller than the Central Bank because of the technology being used in the construction and the floor to ceiling heights.
    Attorney Lalu Hannoman, wearing his Marine Trust hat, also challenged the light which will be generated by the tall buildings as an issue for turtles seeking to nest; while others spoke to the shadow created by the three main buildings.
    With height being a bone of contention with many commenters who posed questions during the Q & A segment, developer James Edgehill also confirmed that they are in discussions with the firefighters and the building standards authority because new equipment will be needed to be acquired. However he went on to say that the equipment will benefit the country as buildings may continue to climb higher beyond Hyatt in the future.
    Oderson said the final design and architectural drawings will be submitted in coming weeks.
    And Maloney emphasised that the questions posed at tonight’s presentation will be taken into account as they move ahead to the Town Hall Meeting. He said that such will be held as is mandated by the legislation to ensure that Barbadians are not blindsided as they move forward.
    Seemingly having learned from his initial attempt to successfully construct a Hyatt Centric at the same location previously, Maloney also confirmed that this toss an environmental study has been conducted and submitted.
    Hyatt Ziva is projected to bring in 2500 jobs during construction and 1500 when in operation along with a total number of indirect jobs in the area of 3270.
    Caricom Ambassador David Commisiong posed three sets of questions, the Ram Merchandis also asked questions along with some from The City, real estate, quality surveying and tourism.

    http://www.loopnewsbarbados.com/content/hyatt-ziva-plans-staying-above-board-assures-developers

    Like

  • Serve Ram right, she love too much court, selling dead chickens to bajans and then suing because it was reported what this wicked beast did to Black Bajans…….nearly 40 YEARS LATER THE CASE IS STILL IN COURT….she is just as much a criminal as the QCs, her lawyers, who still have that horrible case stagnating the court system..

    “She has generously donated to both major political parties i.e. BLP and DLP. Her training as a lawyer allowed her to grease the system for the benefit of all.”

    Corruption…bribing both political parties/governments, bribing customs officers and other civil servants with her brown envelopes, cause she knew the weakminded negros well, what she did not know is that greedy politicians eat bribers too, when the bribe from the other side is much bigger…their eyes are ALWAYS bigger than their stomachs..

    Hers are the FILTHIEST STORES I HAVE EVER SEEN in my life and i have seen stores everywhere …once i wandered in and was so horrified i asked the staff how could they work under such repulsive conditions, a fire hazard did not begin to describe,then the fire station was not even 10 metres down the street so i wondered what kinda halfassed fire station allows such dangerous practices in stores down the street from them, am sure she bribed them too to look the other way, knowing full well that they would.

    …then am like, how much yall get paid for working in this fitlhy dump, i later found out she paid 5 BDS dollars an hour, i won’t hold my breath that that beast ever raised the pay, that is how she TRAPPED YOUNG BLACK PEOPLE IN HER FILTH.

    me thinks her staff were too traumatized to even answer me…both governments colluded with this beast for at least 50 years to treat their people like that, mistreatment, disrespect racism, they can NEVER SEE ANY BETTER FOR THEIR PEOPLE…and dumbass Verla is now trying to paint Ram as a victim, why would anyone want Verla as a leader, she is weakminded.

    …..Barrow allowed this criminal into the island to keep his own people in financial bondage and sell them population inferior quality garbage for decades..

    Like

  • While it is true that we must be vigilant about government’s compulsory acquisition of land let me say that if they must unfair anybody it could not have happened to a better person.

    She treats staff worse than cattle in a cowshed. And as for her husband……well she is not going to sue me so I done with that.

    I would prefer to sweep the streets than to work in her filthy place. I do not shop there. It is a fire hazard. There is no ventilation. I could go on and on but we all know the story.

    The place and her other “establishments” should have been shut down years ago. The staff could probably make more money selling coconuts, ackees and the like.

    Never has the saying “Good riddance to bad rubbish!” been more appropriate. Literally.

    PS. Has she paid the $250,000 in arrears to the BWA as ordered by the court? When will she have to pay the balance?.

    If she is “a broken woman” she is one woman who deserves to be brek.

    Like

  • Verla should be ashamed of herself. Of all the people who have been unfaired in this country she raises her voice on the behalf of this beast

    Like

  • Everyone knows Verla is NOT LEADERSHIP MATERIAL…how she ever passed the bar is a damn mystery, her analysis skills in this case lack of…she herself highlighted with that idiocy….., just goes to show anyone can get a law degree if ya memory is good enuff, wuh even Ram got one and look how despicable she is..

    Like

  • Even worse…they all knew how dirty and disgusting Ram is but from those in government right on down to the clowns in media are always bigging her up as this great business woman fully aware what she has done to 2 gnerations of people in Barbados with her low class, Black Hole of Calcutta practices…

    ….. these hypocrites for Black Bajans are even worse than her.

    Like

  • Google Ms Ram Mirchandani. The lethini of court cases and media reports surrounding the decades of the harm she has cause to this nation is mind numbing. Countless lawyers she has paid to fight every hint of an acquisition instead addressing concerns or even threat the staff well at least. Why should any citizen of this land blink about this. I even worked for her 1 day in my early youth. 1 day was enough for me to see how poorly people were treated and exploited under fear of being “easily replaced”. I could not believe how adults were reduced to child like behaviour.. and I was a child amazed that this spectacle. I knew that I could never allow myself to be consumed by a place and a person(s) such as this.
    Of Course I was a kid and many adults have much more responsibilities and probably felt they had little options and thus the power of ms Ms Ram Mirchandani was sustained.

    Like

  • Bingo! Kudos to you 2bxact!

    Like

  • Wunna talking a bunch of RH. Urban redevelopment is a public objective and therefore a benefit…period. The acquisition of the Liquidation Centre appears essential to facilitating the development of what appears to be a much improved Hyatt scheme as the catalyst for the transformation of Bridgetown. Public benefit is not confined to publicly funded proposals.

    Like

  • Was a man electrocuted while working on Casa Grande?

    Like

  • MONTEGO BAY, St James — Karisma Hotels and Resorts last week announced that it will be investing near US$1 billion to build its 4,800 room multi-resort development project in Llandovery, St Ann.

    Like

  • Piece

    I also took at your comments and laughed out loud thinking how you resort to political game playing instead of answering the question pointed towards Atherley
    Maybe in some issues you might do Atherley a favour and let him speak for himself

    Like

  • On the matter of valuation, an existing use value with a premium appears to be a suitable approach in this situation. Ram musse looking for an alternative use valuation. #tooRHwicked🤣🤣

    Like

  • Now I have got the cussing out of my system let me set aside the emotion and deal with the legality of it.

    Not often I agree with Enuff but today I do 100%. Public good is broader than what some have said here and what he says about the valuation seems quite believable. She should get the value of the existing use.

    Like

  • Layman’s valuation.

    Market value for land and buildings plus loss of business projected for the next 10 years.

    ( would require ms. Ram to show profits for the previous 3 years.)

    Like

  • @ Mariposa formerly Asinine Cretin but still ManyPussy

    What is the title of this article?

    So why is it, that instead of writing your shy$e on the copious other blogs here that specifically reference the People’s Party for Democracy and Development, you here trying to hijack the topic?

    You ole bat yuh!

    Heheheheheheheheh

    Like

  • What loss of business for the next ten years? What would it take for her to set up another shoddy establishment somewhere else? Could be done by next year! Sheds don’t take long to build.

    Like

  • SirSimpleSimonPresidentForLife
    November 19, 2019 10:45 PM

    The state, the government, has EMINENT DOMAIN.

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

    What if the Government is eminently unconstitutional?

    Like

  • Will the new Hotel have its own electricity generating capacity and desalination plant … and sewage disposal?

    Why are we going through this sh!t with these swords of Damocles hanging over our heads?

    Liked by 1 person

  • November 20, 2019 10:01 AM

    SirSimpleSimonPresidentForLife
    November 19, 2019 10:45 PM
    The state, the government, has EMINENT DOMAIN.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++
    What if the Government is eminently unconstitutional?

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

    .. or worse, imminently unconstitutional?

    Like

  • The liquidation centre is a dump. For them to say there is 7 million dollars in stock is dubious at best, a lie at worse.

    Like

  • No one feels an ounce of sympathy for Ms.Ram the issue (for me) is whether an independent valuation was done or whether Gov’t is the sole arbiter of property value.

    Why should anyone trust the Gov’t to do the right thing? Remember when Gov’t zoned land for agricultural use and the moment the land was sold it was immediately zoned for other uses.

    Like

  • Who trusts the government? There should be independent valuation. But Ms. Ram can fight her own battle.

    John,

    We shall get to all these things with the new Hyatt Hotel. Isn’t there supposed to be some sort of town hall meeting or something?

    Like

  • peterlawrencethompson

    NorthernObserverNovember 20, 2019 1:45 AM
    “The buyer (Hyatt developer), and the seller (Mirchandani) could not reach agreement. And then the Government stepped in.”
    +++++++++++++++++
    This is incorrect. The buyer is the government of Barbados. The government already owns the adjacent parcel where the Harbour Police used to be. The developer owns none of the land in the vicinity.

    Like

  • 🚨🚨🚨

    @ Sargeant

    Commander Theophillus Gazerts left and emoticon above and it made me aware that emojis can be added to these submissions.

    The “alarms” above are elicited by your focused observations and voiced remarks about it being a citizen’s task and responsibility to watch the government it elected 30-0

    You comment is more noticeable IN A TIME WHEN, IT IS DANGEROUS TO VOICE AN OPINION THAT IS CONTRARY to the policies of the Party in Power, on peril of your observations being noted as dissenting opinion, AND THEREFORE AN ENEMY TO THE MOTTLEY REGIME!

    De ole man’s Stoopid Cartoons are considered by some crass and crude, by others, disrespectful but, a few see their MAIN AND TRUE purpose.

    All viewers, including the sycophants, immediately see the focal point of the topic and, EVEN IF IT EMOTES THEM TO ANGER, OR DISGUST ABOUT THE DISRESPECT SHOWN TO THEIR RESPECTIVE HEROES, what it does is bring multiple citizens INTO THAT MINDSPACE OF ETERNAL VIGILANCE.

    Friend and foe alike, the governed and THE GOVERNMENT, ALL become aware that they are being watched.

    Comments like your own MUST CONTINUE UNABATED, AND UNFETTERED AND CONSTANT so that, over time, every citizen comes to the realization that it is their right AND EVERY PARLIAMENTARIAN, comprehends that they are accountable to their people.

    Like

  • @Donna

    There was a town hall last night, the Rams were given scant respect by the Chair of the meeting.

    Like

  • @ Sargeant

    The problem is not what kind of person Ms Ram is, even if that is important, the fundamental issue is government’s abuse of process. Today it is Ms Lamb, tomorrow it may be you, figuratively speaking.

    Like

  • peterlawrencethompson

    @Donna November 20, 2019 10:57 AM
    “There should be independent valuation.”
    +++++++++++++++++
    The government is said to have offered them Bd$75 per sq ft for the 80,000 sq ft property: Bd$6 million. They have apparently asked for Bd$250 per sq ft. Other beachfront land on Carlisle Bay is listed for an asking price of Bd$128 per sq ft.

    At the Hyatt public meeting last evening I pointed out the price of comparable lots and asked Mrs Ram in private whether she would consider Bd$130 per sq ft to be a fair offer. She smiled and said yes… but then she claimed that someone had paid $250 per sq ft for another beachfront lot along Bay St. I asked which lot, but she was non committal. A few seconds later she claimed that Rihanna had bought the beachfront lot at Bd$300 per sq ft.

    I have no idea what to make of this confusing conversation.

    Like

  • Ms.Ram sought an injunction to delay the government taking possession of the property after her request for an extension was not granted by the government. She is not contesting the acquisition.
    On the matter of valuation, who did the value on the land tax bill she objected to repeatedly? Pass me with the BS! She pay the BWA yet?

    Like

  • Miss Ram is being visited by Karma. She is a disputable individual who has made a mint on the backs of Black people and exploiting the most vulnerable and greedy.

    Like

  • @plt
    I take your facts as correct. So was the GoB negotiating with Mirchandani? Is the deal the GoB is to lease/sell land to the developers? The GoB is like any other entity, is free to buy property from any party. But if they don’t like the price requested, they invoke compulsory acquisition?

    @Blogmaster
    The last court issue related to relief to delay the sale, so one cannot blame anybody. The courts decided. So no I do not blame the PM.
    The reality the GoB has acquired other nearby properties is great. By private treaty? Very appropriate. By compulsory acquisition? Possible, but I doubt it.

    I do not like to like to invoke situations elsewhere. There are 50 cranes visible from the CN tower, I counted them last week. Daily battles where condo/other developers need a footprint size. Daily battles where there is a holdout owner(s). Is the Government to decide that one development is of such “public value” they must seize the land by invoking eminent domain. NOT unless it is for public use. (Verses public benefit….directly or indirectly)

    Like

  • @Enuff

    Looka you putting me in the invidious position of defending Ms. Ram but people always complain about land/property valuation when it comes to taxes if it will save them money, yuh want to tell me that the other corporations/companies don’t complain? Those valuations have no relation to reality, ask any Bajan if they would sell their property based on the assessed value that the Gov’t provided.

    Like

  • Hal AustinNovember 20, 2019 11:25 AM

    @ Sargeant

    The problem is not what kind of person Ms Ram is, even if that is important, the fundamental issue is government’s abuse of process. Today it is Ms Lamb, tomorrow it may be you, figuratively speaking.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Correction, Hal. Yesterday, today and tomorrow it is us. Who rose to our defence? Ms. Ram has the resources to fight her own battle. If she wins that does not mean the effects will be passed on to us. Let her go to her favourite place again – the courts! If a precedent is set the rest of us stand a chance.

    Why should the court of public opinion help her?

    Steupse!

    Like

  • @Northern Observer

    If this government is serious about developing the Bridgetown area especially given its world heritage status hell yes!

    Like

  • @ Donna

    I am not a property owner in Barbados that the government can take off me of, so I am out of the conversation. I was talking about the principle: Ms Ram could be the Devil, the point is the government is wrong. It is an abuse of process. But I am out.

    Like

  • You do not know but you can be conclusion in your judgement of the matter?

    Like

  • Northern Observer
    The Act says public purposes. The objective of publicly acquiring land for public purposes is the delivery of public benefits. Urban regeneration is a public exercise that serves a public purpose and delivers public benefits. Let me expand on the matter of purpose/benefits as it relates to this matter. Jobs during the construction and operational phases (both directly and indirectly) and foreign exchange are the obvious benefits. In essence economic activity. However, early in this administration’s term it revamped the planning law and in the process placed a heavy emphasis on planning obligations–a practice that is standard in the UK where our planning law originates. Planning obligations simply allows the government to maximise public benefits (or the public purpose) of a development. So in this instance, the government can go further and legally bind the developer to use targeted recruitment, employment and training and procurement; provide publicly accessible beach facilities like changing/bathrooms, public seating areas; and contribute to the greening of Bridgetown for example. They could even seek financial contributions toward infrastructure, maybe some work on or furniture/solar panels/water harvesting equipment etc for St.Ambrose, St.Marys and other primary schools in the area. The removal of Liquidation Centre through public acquisition to facilitate the regeneration of Bridgetown serves a public purpose and is long overdue.

    Like

  • peterlawrencethompson

    @Hal
    The GoB is acting within the ambit of the 1949 Land Acquisition Act. It authorizes compulsory land acquisition “3. (1) Whenever it appears to the Minister that any land is likely to be required for any purposes for which the Crown is authorised by any Act to be to acquire land or for any purposes which, in the opinion of the Minister, are public purposes…”

    So Hal, as you can see, the purposes are ENTIRELY within the digression of the Minister to determine. You may conclude that this colonial era law gives the Minister too much power, but it is crystal clear that the GoB has acted lawfully and the Courts have substantiated this point.

    Like

  • @PLT

    Why do we have to discuss the same thing round and round in circles. If the government is compulsorily purchasing the property (eminent domain) for the public good, then that is right and proper; if it is in order to pass on to a private owner, it is an abuse of process. I ask again: who will own the freehold? All these documents should be public records, both in the planning application and in the order.
    No nonsense argument about urban development, or hotel corridor or providing jobs and tax revenue would justify this in any independent court of law. It may do in Barbados. That is why I say she should go to the CCJ.
    The other non-argument is play the ball and not the person; no matter what we think of Ms Ram, the point is the abuse of process. Such an argument is barbaric. It is like saying Ninja Man should not be given the protection of the law. Savagery. Ms Ram did not arrive in Barbados yesterday – nor is she the only foreigner who behaves in unacceptable ways.
    However, once you allow the state to do this kind of thing our rule of law is dead.

    Like

  • Govt can not acquire property for at tax payers expense for the sole purpose of enabling a private cooperation to build on our use the property for business purpose
    The land or property must be used for govt purposes with out a shadow of infer doubt as to whether has trampled on an Individual constitution rights and the property well serves people and country interest..not showing bias or goodwill towards any business interest

    Like

  • peterlawrencethompson

    @Hal
    But that’s not what the 1949 Land Acquisition Act says. It’s what YOU think, but it isn’t the law. If you are going to talk about the rule of law, you might begin by reading the law.

    Like

  • Lawd fadda. Only few days ago I said that the biggest talkers on BU often don’t know what them talking bout. Ah lie?

    Like

  • @PLT

    What is the legal or philosophical interpretation of public purpose? For an interpretation, do not only go to case law, but to the intention of parliament (or in the case the Executive Council). Read Hansard for the intentions of parliament. Case law may win you a case, but it does not make it morally right. The rule of law is not based on case law (that is incidental), but on the principles of our democracy.
    I am surprised you are depending on 70 yr old colonial legislation to reinforce your argument. Is this a failure of over 50 yrs of independent law-making?

    Like

  • Here begins the veiled capitulation, with the shifting. The usual MO. Now we’re on to what’s morally right; but I would stay far from going down the morality road when Mrs.Ram is the subject. Murdaaaa 🤣🤣🤣

    Like

  • Here begins the capitulation, with the shifting. The usual MO. Now we’re on to what’s morally right; but I would stay far from going down the morality road when Mrs.Ram is the subject. Murdaaaa 🤣🤣🤣

    Like

  • The man hates to be proved wrong.

    Like

  • peterlawrencethompson

    @Hal
    Philosophy does come into it. The law is the law. We are not discussing justice, we are discussing law.
    “3. (1) Whenever it appears to the Minister that any land is likely to be required for any purposes for which the Crown is authorised by any Act to acquire land or for any purposes which, in the opinion of the Minister, are public purposes…”
    There is zero ambiguity. If the Crown is authorised by ANY Act and it APPEARS to the Minister that the land is LIKELY to be required for ANY purposes… then the Minister may acquire the land. Public purpose does not have to enter into it at all. The second clause that deals with public purpose does not define same and leaves its determination entirely up to “the opinion of the Minister.”

    I think the Act is utterly ridiculous in the breadth of power it gives the Minister, but this was par for the course under the Colonial regime. Ridiculous or not, it is the law.

    Like

  • peterlawrencethompson

    Of course the fact that we are governed by 70 yr old colonial legislation Is this a failure of over 50 yrs of independent law-making… but we are governed by the rule of law. Justice be damned.

    Like

  • Wily has only ONE QUESTION — why is government expropriating(compulsory acquiring) land for a PRIVATE DEVELOPER. Having a private developer build a hotel does not fall into the category of NATION INTEREST. May fall into the HELP ME LINE MY POLITICAL POCKETS at the expense of TAXPAYERS though.

    FOOD FOR THOUGHT

    Like

  • @PLT
    I accept now, the law gives the Minister such powers. Scary as they might be. It sets a very dangerous precedent.

    It means that every decision boils down to social context? If the owner is liked, all is good. If not, watch out. The comparative value of other transactions is really irrelevant. Once an area is designated by Government, your land is basically worth less than any market value, because you better beware they may seize it at whatever they consider a fair price. And everybody else knows this.

    AS an aside. Is the GoB selling or leasing this land to Hyatt developers? Or is this the Cuban model, where the Government owns the land, and allows you to use it, one you pay to build and commit to a certain specific use?

    Like

  • One for the ages…..PM of Canada creates a new Ministry of….drum roll…..Middle Class Prosperity.
    Cannot wait to see actual areas of responsibility.

    Like

  • re Only few days ago I said that the biggest talkers on BU often don’t know what them talking bout. Ah lie?

    THESE FOLK ARE BRIMBLERS

    I HAVE BEEN SAYING THAT ON BU FOR YEARS! AND I AM HATED FOR SO SAYING Ah lie?

    Liked by 1 person

  • @NO

    Well he didn’t name a Minister of Loneliness as the Brits have done…..

    Like

  • PTL NEEDS to reference the Constitution and read where the rights of govt might supersede the rights of an individual in reference to eminent domain
    He like Mottley resorts to policies of smoke and mirrors
    Ptl for instance no private citizen can go into that building when completed on official govt business
    pTL your comments are misleading and half truths
    You ought to be ashamed of self.
    I would send u a link to prove u are wrong

    Like

  • Taken from an article. History of eminent domain

    Eminent domain has been utilized traditionally to facilitate transportation, supply water, construct public buildings, and aid in defense readiness. Early federal cases condemned property for construction of public buildings (e.g., Kohl v. United States) and aqueducts to provide cities with drinking water (e.g., United States v. Great Falls Manufacturing Company, 112 U.S. 645 (1884), supplying water to Washington, D.C.), for maintenance of navigable waters (e.g., United States v. Chandler-Dunbar Co., 229 U.S. 53 (1913), acquiring land north of St. Mary’s Falls canal in Michigan), and for the production of war materials (e.g. Sharp v. United States, 191 U.S. 341 (1903)). The Land Acquisition Section and its earlier iterations represented the United States in these cases, thereby playing a central role in early United States infrastructure projects.

    Condemnation cases like that against the Gettysburg Railroad Company exemplify another use for eminent domain: establishing parks and setting aside open space for future generations, preserving places of historic interest and remarkable natural beauty, and protecting environmentally sensitive areas. Some of the earliest federal government acquisitions for parkland were made at the end of the nineteenth century and remain among the most beloved and well-used of American parks. In Washington, D.C., Congress authorized the creation of a park along Rock Creek in 1890 for the enjoyment of the capitol city’s residents and visitors. The Department of Justice became involved when a number of landowners from whom property was to be acquired disputed the constitutionality of the condemnation. In Shoemaker v. United States, 147 U.S. 282 (1893), the Supreme Court affirmed the actions of Congress

    Liked by 1 person

  • Wuhloss…Ram from the Darkest Hole in Calcutta….with her one-eyed crocodile tears.

    Like

  • And this is why MINORITY CROOKS in Barbados can never be trusted, they are all in bed together. ..them and sell out governments.

    Liked by 2 people

  • @enuff
    my apologies, on my phone, I occasionally miss a post as I did yours.
    “Urban regeneration is a public exercise that serves a public purpose and delivers public benefits.”
    True. At least in theory. Urban renewal, is different from regeneration.
    A Government is expected to set the planning and development guidelines, and to designate areas where they intend certain uses to dominate.
    I imagine there is no project nor method which is beyond the broad interpretation of public purpose and public benefit?
    If other bloggers are accurate, and, the developers currently own no land, and the government already owned properties adjacent to Mrs Ram, it may “appear” they were other lands which could be used?
    In any case I await to see how the land is sold/leased, if the GoB re-enters the hotel market and how, and how many other properties they acquire. This clearly sends a message to all landowners in a “designated area” that land value is based upon whatever value the GoB’s expropriation value will be.

    Liked by 1 person

  • peterlawrencethompson

    @Mariposa
    Nonsense as usual. American law and precedents do not apply in Barbados until AFTER Trump invades.
    Please go and read the constitution then point out to us where the 1949 Land Acquisition Act will be found to be unconstitutional. I’ll wait.
    I would actually love to be proven wrong about this because I think the 1949 Land Acquisition Act is dangerous over-reach… but it’s the law.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @Sarge
    lol…loneliness was a remit of the Ministry, not the title of. What do you think are the remits of “Middle Class Proserity” are? Taxation? Wages/Salary? The PM already has defined MIDDLE as not being the top 1%. I think the new Minister of MCP is in charge of all but the top 1% of income earners?

    Like

  • Boss man that area IS designated for hotel and tourism oriented development, not warehouse retail and certainly not an old musty building. Urban renewal and urban regeneration is the same thing. When the Dems were pushing the Hyatt I talked about land consolidation i.e land assembly to deliver a better scheme.

    Look what obtains in Hal Austin’s neck of the woods. Note land assembly and urban regeneration is large off as a benefit.

    “A CPO is a forced sale of a property to the Council, authorised by the Secretary of State. CPOs are an important tool for local authorities to use as a means of assembling the land needed to help deliver social and economic change. Used properly, they can contribute towards an effective urban regeneration and revitalisation of communities.”

    Like

  • peterlawrencethompson

    @ Mariposa
    Here is the part from the Barbados Constitution that you are looking for:
    “16. (1) No property of any description shall be compulsorily taken
    possession of, and no interest in or right over property of any description
    shall be compulsorily acquired, except by or under the authority
    of a written law, and where provision applying to that acquisition or
    taking of possession is made by a written law…”

    The written law is the 1949 Land Acquisition Act.

    Like

  • PTL don’t u try blowing smoke in my face
    The long and short being govt does not have a Constitutional right to use eminent domain as privilege to buy land or property and tranfer said parcel into the hands of private developer
    It is taxpayers money used to ourchase the property and therefore the transfer is deemed illegal
    It is wrong !wrong! and illegal
    Only a political parasite would go along with such illegality

    Liked by 1 person

  • peterlawrencethompson

    @Mariposa
    If you want to argue that something is illegal you need to read the actual law… it isn’t illegal because it makes you feel bad.

    Like

  • As usual many here are concerned more with racism and dislike for the party than precident. Let me try and help you out that dark hole so lets now consider the below scenario.

    Mrs Brathwaite a 80 year old black Barbadian lady owns a small chattel house on a west coast beach that has been in her family for over 100 years. Her grandfather paid £20 for it back then.

    A large hotel wants to build to her South and they want to buy the land, but old Mrs Braithwaite has grandchildren that love spending time at the beach. The hotel investors then go to government and say “now listen here we got $500M to invest and this foolish old black woman in we way, so you all deal with it.”

    Government then uses compulsory acquisition to force Mrs Braithwaite off her land at what price they deem fair. She is told ” left by month end nobody ain’t entertaining you no more.” Government then proceeds to sell the land to the investors thereby acting as a property broker.

    You mean to tell me some of wunna so blasted foolish and blinded by yardfowlism that you don’t see a serious precident being set here?

    I hope neither of you all fowls don’t have a granny with a desirable piece of land, because today it is Mrs Ram but tomorrow it could be Granny Fowl!

    Liked by 2 people

  • ,JohnA
    Your comment makes no sense because the two scenarios are not the same

    PLT
    Thanks!! The jackass talking about US law–eminent domain–when the land acquisition act is the reference point. But here is a query, if government shouldn’t acquire land to facilitate a private developer building a Hyatt, why should government be allowed to sell public land for a private developer to build a Hyatt?

    Like

  • What was the land arrangement at Coverley?

    Like

  • BLACK Bajans have to be educated to the fact that unless they STOP THESE SPITEFUL NASTY GOVERNMENTS FROM TAKING UP THEIR PROPERTIES…it will continue…

    EDUCATION = when you purchase a property YOU REGISTER IT OFFSHORE…create a company and set up your porperties in that company….it is done in Caymans, Bermuda, Turks & Caicos and a few other jurisdictions…ask all the crooked thiefing ministers and lawyers…that is where they put what they tief…

    it is understandable that the elderly victims of both governments would not have known this and NO ONE WOULD HAVE TOLD THEM…so naturally they all got robbed.

    but now everyone knows how to sidestep government theft of properties..

    BTW the criminal Ram got nothing stolen from her, she is holding out for more millions for the property….that is all…they should take everything from her and only pay her for one.

    Like

  • @JohnA
    you forget to mention the area in which the Brathwaite’s property was located, had been designated as a “special use area”. This is the key to making your comparison.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Enuf you are even a bigger yard fowl than I thought previously if you can see the precident being set!

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ Northern

    So true and as The act of compulsory acquisition covers the entire island under the 1949 law, then an area of ” special use ” is where ever I say it is!

    All hail Hitler!

    Liked by 1 person

  • Ptl. Do not have a dog in this issue outside when govt by pass Constitutional law at taxpayers expense to pave the way for private entities
    Now u might think that is ok.but then again it is not what u think but what the Constitution deems is right

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ Northern.

    I hope when this same approach is used on the west coast to take beach front property from small black Barbadians to satisfy the foreign investors, all are satisfied. Before those that know no better start to say that black bajans don’t own west coast beach front land, take a drive down the west coast and check it first. Now how did small black bajans come to own beach front west coast land to begin with?

    Well in 1940 beach front land on the west coast or what was ” the crab land cross the road”, was selling at 6 cents a square foot, dead serious! You see the white planters who owned the estates deemed this land worthless as it couldn’t grow cane. In fact a piece of beach front land then was some of the cheapest available. A piece of land for instance in ” the sugar belt” would have been several times more expensive then. So black bajans like Granny Fowl and Mrs Braithwaite had parents who bought this land, not because it was beach front, but because this “crab land” was some of the cheapest on the island!

    So when wunna start with the Indian woman don’t complain when the next victim might be a black bajan second generation beach front owning granny, whose father paid 6 cents a square ft in 1940 for the land their family chattel home sat on!

    All that still want to argue all is well with this move, I hope all wunna family land in st George and st Thomas. Although a few years back a politician did offer the people in st George a beach in front Gun Hill and a fishing village with a pier! LOL

    Liked by 1 person

  • [video src="https://barbadosunderground.files.wordpress.com/2019/11/ram-pm.mp4" /]

    Liked by 2 people

  • peterlawrencethompson

    It’s important to remember that the 1949 Land Acquisition Act predates the constitution by 15 years. It was used extensively to acquire and pay for several plantations and other large tracts of land which were vested in the Housing Authority and later the National Housing Corporation for development and sale in lots to low and middle-income earners at lending rates substantially below the market. There was a 1999 case in which Parsons Pest Control successfully challenged Government’s compulsory acquisition of 17 acres of land. However, when Michael Lashley was a minister in the last government he made the case that the Act was out of date and favoured the Crown too strongly, but they never sat down to write replacement legislation.

    Like

  • For those interesting in reading the Land Acquisition Act to plug the hot air from escaping from the nether regions.

    https://barbadosunderground.files.wordpress.com/2019/11/land-aquisition-actpdf.pdf

    Like

  • @ Enuff November 20, 2019 5:34 PM
    “Boss man that area IS designated for hotel and tourism oriented development, not warehouse retail and certainly not an old musty building. Urban renewal and urban regeneration is the same thing. When the Dems were pushing the Hyatt I talked about land consolidation i.e land assembly to deliver a better scheme.”
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Now “enuff” of those urban planning technicalities!

    Even though the unfinished hotel site next to the KFC on Hastings would make for a better appeal to the Hyatt-type clientele than the proposed one on the perimeter ring of a dirty rundown dying Bridgetown.

    Of course only those stupid conservative Bajans would try to oppose the construction of any modern-looking hotel which is being promoted to bring hundreds of millions in foreign exchange with the creation of hundreds of ‘real’ jobs ‘designed’ to stimulate bustling commercial activity and to attract all the CSME whores to the Bay Street arena to rekindle the halcyon days of Harry’s Nitery.

    So let us get to the juicy meat of this long-standing matter of a promised erection.

    Why can’t the Maloney fella put an end to this controversy and show Bajans the money needed to build his Hyatt Centric now Ziva USD $175 Million dream of a Bay View lighthouse of God?

    Please Mr. MM, tell us the source of the financing of your dream world Ziva project.

    That should put a final lid on the boiling mouth of Mrs. Ram & Co.

    Would the settlement of this ‘forced’ land acquisition be made from the taxpayers’ hard up kitty or would the land be immediately sold on to the Hyatt Ziva project with the lawyers taking their cut?

    At least she would not have to wait for over 20 years like other Bajans for the proceeds from the compulsory acquisition of their properties.

    Like

  • @PLT

    Don’t get me wrong I am not challenging the 1949 Act. Yes it is law and hence is applicable. My concern like Michael Lashley’s, is that it could be misused and in fact work in the exact opposite of the purpose for which it was created.

    Further complicating the issue is that it appears the government is now using a 70 year old unrevised law to act as a property broker.

    I can’t but wonder who will be the next victim of this approach.

    Liked by 1 person

  • STATEMENT ON THE COMPULSORY ACQUISITION OF LIQUIDATION CENTRE PROPERTY OWNED BY RAM MERCHANDANI

    The Democratic Labour Party has watched with alarm as one of the icons in merchandising in Barbados is being summarily stripped of her property and business.

    Mrs. Ram has serviced the working-class sector of Barbados and has been a fixture of the local retail sector for half a century and should be celebrated for her contributions over the years. In fact former Barbados Prime Minister, the late David Thompson, is one of hundreds who acquired a vacation job at one of her businesses during their school careers.

    The action of forcing her out before Christmas affects not only her but also the members of staff who suddenly find themselves on the breadline compliments of the Government of Barbados.

    It is the DLP’s understanding that the Merchandani property is being acquired to make room for the Hyatt Hotel.
    But this is a private sector enterprise, and the Democratic Labour Party is at a loss as to how this Government has continually used the force of law and tax payers money to push the agenda of private developers in this matter.

    This Mottley Administration must come clean and live up to its promise of transparency and tell the people of Barbados what is the public purpose here.

    A town hall meeting is called for today, Tuesday by the Hyatt developers and we would wish to know if the environmental impact assessment which was one of the so-called impediments to construction under a DLP administration, has been completed?

    We would wish the Government to tell the country why the Government is bullying a businesswoman out of her business and putting Barbadians on the breadline at Christmas on behalf of a private project.

    It is to be noted that Mrs. Ram did not refuse to move. An extension into the Christmas season was requested. Had they the company required a further extension following the holidays such actions as we are witnessing now could be understood.

    This is a stunningly high-handed and uncaring move which is becoming characteristic of this government.

    The Barbados Labour Party (BLP) marketed itself as caring but at every turn has been disappointing the electorate which placed such overwhelming confidence in them.

    It is becoming increasingly apparent to many Barbadians that this BLP Government cares only for a small sector of the society in which we all must survive.

    Image may contain: 1 person, smiling, close-up

    Like

  • What beautiful picture no doubt she is 100% of the female gender

    Like

  • SirSimpleSimonPresidentForLife

    @John ANovember 20, 2019 6:49 PM “Well in 1940 beach front land on the west coast or what was ” the crab land cross the road”, was selling at 6 cents a square foot,”

    Well land values go up and go down. I was told that my father’s grandmother (born in the 1850’s) owned land at Gibbes Beach, and that she operated a bakery there.

    6 cents a square foot then.

    With global warming and sea level rise it will be 6 cents a square foot again by the time my great grand chidren are adults.

    Like

  • JohnA
    Stuupse! Talking shyte, therefore resort to yardfowl. Nothing new. You’re missing the fundamental argument that’s driving the acquisition. Most laws if abused would result in unfair treatment to an individual(s). Weak argument! The point is that there is public purpose here underpinned by what appears to be a comprehensive approach to addressing Bridgetown.

    Miller
    What’s with the rambling? What does the word regeneration portray? That’s why in an earlier post I mentioned the word catalyst. Regeneration has to start somewhere. I don’t get your pints. You need to avail yourself of government’s plans. It is not just Hyatt!!

    Like

  • What Hyatt
    Well keep waiting what Hyatt
    How come all of a sudden Hyatt named is used within govt utterances for more land space
    Right now i am looking at Ghana nurses and housing space
    Would not be surprise if the land would be use for condiminum to house Ghana nurses

    Like

  • @ the Sage Annunaki

    They have finessed the money through a consortium of whom a well known person is part.

    Heheheheh

    But I ent tell you nuffin

    Like

  • @ the Honourable Blogmaster your assistance please with an item here for the Sage Annunaki thank you

    Like

  • Losing a job at Ms. Ram is the equivalent of emancipation. I encourage the former workers to look inside themselves and dream bigger. Then set out to make it happen. They deserve better and can do better.

    Like

  • It is easy for u to advice people who have lost a job on how they should be happy
    One can easily bet that your pantry has food and your bills are paid
    Sometimes it makes for wonder how people can soeak on behalf of those whose shoes they have never walked in
    Those people made a statement because they are looking at a siruation where they might not be able to meet their obligations for who knows how long
    But here comes another long neck goose telling these out of job workers they should be happy

    ######jesus

    Like

  • @JohnA
    Don’t fret yourself. While this could create problems down the road, nobody cares.
    Projects like Four Seasons, Harlequin, maybe Sam Lords, the skeleton at Caribee, the one across from the Rocks, these are some of the challenges. FDI wants to know “what happened”.
    If B’dos can get additional groups to invest, all the power to them and, Irish You Well.
    While some may argue tourism is not a solution to create social or economic change, it can help and is a path of least resistance.
    We still have Blue Horizon, other Gems properties, plus a group of currently non-operating, but once vibrant hotel properties.
    The locations are there, the owner\operators harder to find.
    Unlike some, maybe even you, I give the PM a better than average score. That doesn’t mean one must agree with everything.

    Like

  • Miller.. i have always known that Ziva is a jewish name so Hyatt Ziva is likely connected to some unsavoury, as usual investor, more than likely from Israel or some other country with jewish claim..

    Bajans more than ever have to be very vigilant since neither governemnt nor crook Maloney are saying who is running that side show in secret..it’s long time the jews out of IsNOTrael were trying to get into Barbados through the unsavory Altman to spread their filthy RACIST poison and ya done know the house negros looking for bribes will never stop them….so just keep watching in case this is the long CON they were all working on for decades..

    “Where is the name Ziva from?
    Name: Ziva. Gender: Female. Usage: Ziva, of hebrew origin, is not a popular first name. It is more often used as a girl (female) name. People having the name Ziva are in general originating from Czech Republic, Israel, Slovenia.”

    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