Government Complicit in the Liquidation Centre Matter

The Editor
Barbados Underground

Dear Sir/Madam

Recently,the Attorney General, Mr. Dale Marshall made some observations about the “Liquidation Center” which has been compulsory acquired by government. According to Marshall, the Center has been deemed unfit by the Public Health officials due to the high rodent infestation among other things. Marshall also went onto claim that four illegal connections to the potable water supply of this country were discovered on the premises of the “Liquidation Center.” I have some question that need clarification by Marshall.

1.) Were there inspections of the premises by the Public Health (Environmental) Officers up to the point of closure by government? If the answer is yes,the question remains why was the premises not closed before the seizure by government? One is left to infer that either there was political interference by both sets of government, hindering the Public Health Officers from doing their job, or that the Public Health Officers looked the other way,to avoid witnessing all of the defects which have suddenly appeared.

2). The four illegal connections to the country’s potable water supply seems to be a red-herring deflecting from the high-handed manner in which the closure took place. Marshall wants the populace to believe that with the water being disconnected, the business continued apace without toilet facilities. At some point following disconnection, the authorities must have wondered how it was that the business continued apace without a pause. One is left to conclude that there was some kind of tacit connivance on the part of the authorities.

The government seems to be acting in an totalitarian manner in this affair. In small countries like Barbados one must be on guard against totalitarianism .



Robert D. Lucas, PH.D.


  • Vincent Codrington

    @ Hal Austin

    I am reading you loud and clear,despite the noise. You must recall the adage that “there is none so blind as he who does not want to see.” I am forced to agree that there is indeed a Barbadian Condition. I need to be inoculated.


  • Lord I give up. Lol


  • @HA
    because you have now repeated it many times….where did you learn that “the DPP withdrew the case on the grounds of so-called public interest”. Everything I read reported, said it was due to a lack of evidence.


  • @ David December 7, 2019 12:34 PM

    Why was some of the NIS ‘easy’ money put into the Apes Hill Development project?

    Was it not seen as a golden opportunity to drive development in the vital forex earning sector of the large import-based high conspicuous consumption Bajan economy and also to grab at the chance to earn a decent ROI on the funds to meet long-term pension liabilities?

    So why do you think the Hyatt case would be any different?

    Liked by 1 person

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ John A at 1:24 PM

    Have you given up already? This is just the beginning. I believe you have stopped in order to breathe . Catch you breath ,my boy, the road is long.


  • @ Vincent

    You right to laugh at me I ain’t vex wid yuh.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @Miller

    At some point you have to believe that mistakes will not be repeated I’d not what is the point?


  • @ Northern Observer

    It was reported at the time the case was abandoned. I immediately jumped on it and like most thing it had an echo. In journalism there is also the concept of public interest. We always say because the public is interested does not mean it is in the public interest. It is also a key concept in philosophy and law.
    That is why I was (am) keen to see what the Bajan definition was (is). I hope you are happy with this because I have a couple books on the subject but won’t know where to find them. Part of my mis-spent youth.

    Liked by 1 person

  • As far as the blogmaster is aware and confirmed in the link the case against Herbert was dropped because of lack of evidence.


  • I always hear about throwing out a sprat to ketch a shark. I posted that link on purpose because I knew that Hal would jump out and boast, as Miller always accuse him of living in a flat in Brent. I will now go through his response piece by piece.

    “This is what we call urban regeneration. Not a single privately owned hotel.”

    Firstly, the same Hal previously argued that urban regeneration is not a public purpose. Secondly, urban regeneration is tailored to suit the context; therefore, the regeneration of Bridgetown will not mirror Brent Cross. Secondly, it is known that the regeneration of B’town does not consists solely of one hotel as is being dishonestly purported by the expert. The PDP includes a separate plan for Bridgetown, which sets the context for regeneration. This is supported by the Special Development Areas Act with incentives. There was also a Pierhead master plan. So his talk about there being no documents etc is yet another example of the expert being uninformed and pretending to know everything.

    I also knew that the expert would point to the housing etc. What is KEY to the link is that the CPO facilitates private development, which includes the traditional public purpose housing, infrastructure etc, but also privately owned retail and office space. So do we now accept that land is CPOed for private developers’ use? Why didn’t the private developers negotiate purchasing the land on their own? Having said all of this, what is the creation of jobs, the physical and economic transformation of Bridgetown if not public purpose? In concluding, I restate that the acquisition of Ms.Ram property to facilitate the construction of a Hyatt hotel by a private developer as part of the regeneration of Bridgetown is logical and is no different to providing and expanded shopping centre and office space. Y’all can continue to inflate Hal’s ego but he’s out of his depth….as nusual.


  • It comes to about Bd$130/sq ft. Much more than the Bd$75/sq ft that they say that they have been offered, but much less than the $250/sq ft that they are demanding.


    I know of a piece of land, about 2 acres of beachfront property on the South Coast, lets say 100,000 sft, that sold in 2005 for 12 million.

    A couple of months later was flipped for $18 million and then advertised at $25 million, all within a year.

    $120/sft –> $180/sft –> $250/sft.

    A matter of record so Ms. Ram is couple of steps ahead of the game and way above most people’s pay grade.

    She knows she is dealing with con artists and she been around long enough and dealt with enough con artists spanning two centuries to ensure she won’t be an easy mark!!

    All a matter of record for Ms. Ram to follow!!

    Maybe the GOB should offer her the lot opposite the Esplanade it owns with the unproductive office space and see if she considers it a fair exchange!!


  • @ David December 7, 2019 1:50 PM

    The litany of recurring mistakes as outlined in the multiple Auditor General’s reports indicate that this is a deliberately set course of agreed action by the political class playing the electorate like a game of ‘piggy-in-the-middle’.

    Based on hearsay and what is recorded in the various manifestoes of both parties can you identify any difference between what was sold to the people in 2008 to what took place as a grand larceny of the naïve people’s trust in 2018?

    Who is carrying the can for these deliberately repeated ‘mistakes?

    Who is fooling whom if not naïve you?

    What would convince you that William Skinner is right on the money when he bets on the Duopoly remaining in business unless a tsunami of a third force visits the Bajan political shores?

    Would you be convinced, at last, if MAM offers a knighthood to both the Right Honourable (RH) Freundel and Owen as a perfect example of peace in the political valley before the dawning of the Republic of Barbados?


  • @ Enuff December 7, 2019 2:25 PM
    “Having said all of this, what is the creation of jobs, the physical and economic transformation of Bridgetown if not public purpose? In concluding, I restate that the acquisition of Ms.Ram property to facilitate the construction of a Hyatt hotel by a private developer as part of the regeneration of Bridgetown is logical and is no different to providing and expanded shopping centre and office space.”

    Ok, “Enuff” we hear you loud and clear.

    Based on what you have argued, and must it be said, rather convincingly, are you suggesting that the GoB would have a stake in that Hyatt Hotel property based on its contribution of additional land?

    Now, you couldn’t want a more long-term investment than that involving the asset called land, that is ‘real’ property and not just concrete and fittings!


  • Come to think of it, Ms. Ram is the only real mega Hotel Magnate in Barbados.

    Mr. Maloney should step back and see if he can’t do business with her!!

    After all, she’s got what he ain’t got!!


  • @HA
    “It was reported at the time the case was abandoned”. Are you sure? What I read reported, was there was a lack of evidence.


  • @ Enuff

    Why are you fabricating nonsense. Plse give details, on BU or anywhere else, when I said urban regeneration was not a public good. That is my very point. The Hyatt development is not a public good. I would normally ignore this crap, but some clever guy in future will quote it as fact.
    Simple man, how could urban regeneration (redevelopment) in Barbados mirror that in London. But, in every case, it must be in the public interest. That is the issue about Ms Ram’s property. If the redevelopment of Bridgetown is not a single hotel, plse tell me where I can find a complete urban redevelopment proposal, which includes the Hyatt Hotel.
    Not just developments as silos, but a comprehensive development plan (ie urban redevelopment, not a pierhead development, or a Fairchild Street development, etc. a joined up plan).
    Section 106 of the 1990 Town and Country Planning Act of England and Wales allows for local authorities (planning authorities) and property developers to work together. Don’t talk about something you know nothing about.
    For example, a new block of flats may get permission to go ahead if a number of those flats are set aside for social housing. Or a development could get the go-ahead if the developer offers to build a youth club.
    Or, in Brent, as you mentioned Brent, a local library was sold to developers to be used to build flats AND A LIBRARY. So locals still have their library and additional flats.
    (I have written about this principle in one of my old Notes….something I said governments of Barbados should utilise, especially in relation to West Coast developments). So your point is irrelevant (unless you are going to fabricate a case that I have also denied this too)..
    I am still waiting for a legal (or planning) definition of public interest. Still waiting. And waiting. By the way, I do not and have never lived in a flat in Brent, but it shows how crap can be picked up by the brain-dead and used again. In fact, I once lived in Golders Green, a few hundred yards away from Brent Cross.
    Stick to the argument and stop with what you think are personal digs. To me they say you are out of an argument. You seem obsessed with the idea that my ego needs inflating. I have never made any such claim for myself. I like challenging nonsense put forward by silly people, otherwise I am a happy bunny..

    Liked by 1 person

  • GPDecember 5, 2019 7:30 PM



    If it wasn’t known it is because you guys were not listening not because the people were not speaking.

    I repeat – how is what’s happening to Ms. Ram change the status quo for the average man? When Ms. Ram gets her “justice” will we get ours?

    Hardly likely!

    We all know there is one law for the Medes and another for the Persians.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ Northern Observer

    When the three appeared before Magistrate Douglas Frederick this morning the prosecutor, Acting Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) Trevor Blackman informed the sitting of the recommendations from the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) Queen’s Counsel Donna Babb-Agard regarding the case.
    ASP Blackman reading from a memorandum from the DPP which indicated that no further action would be taken against 62-year-old Herbert, of Redland Plantation, St George.
    “A thorough review of the police file does not reach the evidential standard which justifies proceeding with the case against accused Arthur [Charles] Herbert,” the prosecutor who was acting as the DPP’s representative in the matter said.

    He explained that the decision was taken on the grounds of the evidential test and the public interest test – which fall under the Code for Public Prosecutor of Barbados 2014.(Quote)


  • And are the two considerations exclusively used in backwater Little Britain the failed state? Guess what, similar consideration was used to support DPP decisions by the former colonial master in the UK. Another failed state?

    Click to access in-the-public-interest.pdf


  • @Miller

    Here is what we know:

    • the government is in dire need for projects to mobilize to kickstart economic activity especially in the construction sector for obvious reasons.
    • the government has gone out of its way to acquire Ms. Rams dump location to facilitate the proposed Hyatt project.
    • one must assume there is some legitimacy to the transaction which will have to be revealed at some point.
    • the blogmaster will stake all common sense on the bet funding will NOT come from the depleted NIS scheme which is our Rh lifeline.


  • @ Hal Austin

    Ignorant people like to wallow in their own ignorance and arrogance.

    You are wasting your time with these Bufoons who will try to prove you wrong at every turn to satisfy their small-minded mentalities.

    IT ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS Barbados is up shit creek without a paddle.


  • @ Baje



  • The buffoons must be doing some thing right with you lot logged in day and night.


  • @HA
    fair enough.
    However you forgot to include the paragraphs which followed, in your quote from Barbados Today.

    “The public interest test, Blackman said, required that serious cases such as possession and trafficking of illicit drugs, once grounded in the sufficiency of the evidence, must be prosecuted in the public’s interest.”
    “There is an inordinate prevalence of drug offences in Barbados and of the deleterious effects of drugs on our society and more particularly the youth. In cases such as this one, consideration must be given to factors such as, the seriousness of the offences committed; the level of culpability of each accused and the impact which these types of offences have on the community.
    “The evidential test, requires that there must be enough evidence to provide ‘realistic prospect of conviction’ against each accused on these drug charges . . . that evidence must be reliable and probative . . .[and] meet the required standard to pass the evidential stage.”
    As such he told Magistrate Frederick, “No further action should be taken against accused Herbert.” [Quote]

    How you can conclude “the DPP withdrew the case on the grounds of so-called public interest”, seems to be ‘reaching’? What was lacking was the sufficiency of evidence.


  • @Hal

    It is a joy to read your contributions across the many posts.


  • David December 7, 2019 4:31 PM

    Point #1…true
    #3..assumptions of “legitimacy” and “revealing” are risky, when dealing with politicians, even if you cover with “at some time”
    #4…does the NIS buying GoB paper, the funds from which are used to create a “Hotel development Fund” any different from a direct loan?


  • @ Northern Observer

    Plse read the extract from the original report. How you interpret that is up to you. My point is the need for clarity about what is a Barbadian legal definition of public interest. In the UK I can tell you how we interpret public interest, in theory and in case law, which means if the basics are not followed the state can be challenged.
    In journalism there is also a public interest aspect ie libel law and privacy, etc. The Leveson Inquiry also dealt with the concept. The question is: what do we mean when we use the phrase in Barbados?




  • You always must be right even when you are proved WRONG!

    @Northern Observer

    The conclusion by the blogmaster is based on the tipping point consideration. There is no wiggle room or opportunity under BERT / IMF to restart the paper printing factory.


  • Is it in the Public’s Interest?
    The most common justification that journalists make for their work is that it is “in the public interest.” It is this notion that underscores the moral authority of journalism to ask hard questions of people in power, to invade the privacy of others and to sometimes test the limits of ethical practice in order to discover the truth.
    But what exactly is the public interest? And how do journalists ensure that they always respect it in the way they work? The following text goes some way to providing answers and owes much to a recent posting of Bob Egginton in the journalism support site Media Helping Media.
    Put simply, the public interest is about what matters to everyone in society. It is about the common good, the general welfare and the security and well-being of everyone in the community we serve.
    The public interest is not just what the readers, listeners or viewers want either as consumers or people who want to be entertained.
    It is about issues which affect everyone, even if many of them are not aware of it or even if they don’t appear to care.
    Normally, it is clear to journalists and editors what is and what is not in the public interest, but sometimes it’s a complex question, particularly where privacy is concerned.
    It may be useful, therefore, to try to apply a public interest test.
    The first task, however, is to separate what is in the public interest from those things members of the public are interested in; they are not necessarily the same.
    Many people may be interested, for instance, in celebrity and popular culture, and demonstrably less interested in the dull realities of public services. But the potential for dramatic impact on peoples’ lives makes the provision of basic services – transport, education, health, sanitation, for instance – absolutely vital matters of public concern.
    Just because the public is interested in something has nothing to do with whether it is in the public interest.
    The public interest is in having a safe, healthy and fully-functioning society. In a democracy, journalism plays a central role in that. It gives people the information they need to take part in the democratic process. That is why there is a public service ethic at the heart all of serious journalism.
    If journalists are good at their job, and to win the rust of the public they must hold governments and other institutions to account and they must act and behave ethically.
    The Media Helping Media site’s training modules on editorial ethics cover many of the issues involved.
    But sometimes there are reasons to vary from standard, good practice, in order to bring an important subject to the public’s attention.
    Journalists should be open and honest about who and what they are. They should always give their names and say which news organisation they work for.
    However, sometimes a journalist may have to resort to subterfuge to expose wrongdoing. Such acts of deception are normally to be avoided, but if it is necessary to deliver justice it may be justified in the wider public interest.
    The privacy test
    Privacy is the critical test of ethical journalism and the public interest. Journalists should not intrude into the private lives of ordinary people, after all most people do not live in the glare of public life.
    But people who are public figures – politicians, or corporate leaders, or people who exploit and rely on their public image for their livelihood, or who carry a public responsibility such as police officers, teachers and doctors – are sometime people whose private affairs may have an important impact on their public duties.
    Media intrusion, ethically justified by reasons of the public interest, exposes hypocrisy and dishonesty. But whenever it is used it must be justified. The reasons for the intrusion must be clearly explained to the public. It must be linked to the wider public interest.
    Some countries build “the public interest” into their legal systems. For example, a number of countries protect “whistleblowers” who speak out wrongdoing in their place of work. It is important, therefore, to examine the legal conditions in which information is given and whether or not it has legal protection when it is revealed in the public interest.
    The Impact Test
    One important way of testing whether there is a public interest in journalistic work is to evaluate what the impact of publication will be. How will publication affect the people – who will suffer and who will benefit? Does wider society benefit from publication?
    This is a difficult and delicate judgement, and each case must be judged carefully. At stake is not just the potential victims of poor reporting, but the reputation of journalists and the media organisation may well suffer if publication is perceived as not acting in the public interest.
    An interesting case concerns the actions of a tabloid newspaper in the United Kingdom which began publishing pictures and names and addresses of known paedophiles as part of a “name and shame” campaign. This was cut short after considerable protests over whether the wider public interest was served by putting some of these individuals at risk of public hostility.
    The decision on the question of public interest needs to be taken at the highest level. The decision must be taken by the editor, or the highest available authority in your news organisation. Even so, it may not be the right one, but where controversy is possible it is always wise for there to be a proper reflection on the issues and possible consequences.
    Normally publications should seek to correct significant wrongs, should promote the well-being, welfare and safety of the public, should raise public awareness of important issues and should make a contribution towards promoting good conduct in public life.
    The public interest tests set out here can help journalists to resolve difficult ethical dilemmas. Even when they have to do work which sometimes does not fit well with their obligations to be open they can preserve their integrity and maintain their ethical balance when they can justify acting in the public interest.


  • The “public interest” is a political concept that’s regularly trotted out along with other democratic principles such as transparency and accountability. And, like transparency and accountability, it’s difficult to pin down exactly what it means.
    Deputy NSW Ombudsman Chris Wheeler has pointed out:
    … while it is one of the most used terms in the lexicon of public administration, it is arguably the least defined and least understood … identifying or determining the appropriate public interest in any particular case is often no easy task.
    Centuries of scholarship examine the public interest alongside the “common good”, “common interest”, and “public good”, associated with some big names in political philosophy. Common among their thinking was the idea that governments should serve the people, and the people should be the beneficiaries of governing.
    Why is the public interest so hard to define?
    The public interest is such a complex and tricky concept to navigate because it has intentionally evolved as ambiguous and mutable. It has no overarching definition because it is contextually determined in scope and purpose.
    This means, in any particular instance, political, legal and regulatory authorities make judgement calls. And what may be deemed in the public interest today may not be in a decade; it changes with social mores and values.

    For example, during the UK’s Leveson Inquiry into the media, the public interest came under close scrutiny. The inquiry found media practice should better reflect the contemporary views of the British public.
    As Guardian blogger Andrew Sparrow said:
    50 years ago it was assumed that there was a public interest in knowing that an MP was gay, but little or no public interest in whether he drove home drunk, hit his wife or furnished his house using wood from non-sustainable sources. Now, obviously, it’s the other way round.

    Legal bodies and judgements also steer clear of definitions. The Australian Law Reform Commission has expressly noted:
    Public interest should not be defined.

    And, in a Federal Court Freedom of Information case, justice Brian Tamberlin wrote:
    The public interest is not one homogenous undivided concept. It will often be multi-faceted and the decision-maker will have to consider and evaluate the relative weight of these facets before reaching a final conclusion as to where the public interest resides.
    Most will never have reason or occasion to engage with the public interest in an official sense; we leave that to politicians, officials, judges, heads of inquiries, and so on. Wheeler places the onus squarely on their shoulders:
    Public officials have an overarching obligation to act in the public interest.
    Public interest is about more than compliance
    Monday night’s Four Corners program put the Gold Coast City Council and its “developers, donations and big decisions” under a public interest spotlight.

    ABC Four Corners program All That Glitters.
    What was intriguing about the program was the conflation of the public interest with “real or perceived conflicts of interest” as relating to development issues.
    Gold Coast Mayor Tom Tate and his deputy, Donna Gates, both described staying in council chambers to participate in discussion and vote on development issues citing the “public interest” as holding overriding importance.
    Giving evidence before the Crime and Corruption Commission, Gates said:
    I have, in the main, stayed in the room to vote in the public interest because I firmly believe that that’s what I need to do.
    Journalist Mark Willacy and Tate pointed out that all behaviour is legally compliant. Willacy concluded:
    What’s happening with development here is well within the law and to many that’s the problem.
    But (despite its lack of definition) the public interest should mean more than legal compliance – it is as much about process and procedure as it is outcome. It’s also about governance and ethics.
    Wheeler lists seven elements that better round out the full process that should take place:
    complying with applicable law (both its letter and spirit);
    carrying out functions fairly and impartially;
    complying with the principles of procedural fairness/natural justice;
    acting reasonably;
    ensuring accountability and transparency;
    exposing corrupt conduct or serious maladministration;
    avoiding or properly managing private interests conflicting with official duties; and
    acting apolitically in the performance of official functions.
    There’s no rule book for working in the public interest and, despite arguments that it is too loose, ambiguous and easy to hide behind, it is an integral part of the discourse, law, regulation and governance of modern democracies.
    Some professions, such as the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, have tackled it head-on. This would seem a prudent measure for all professions in the future.


  • @ Baje

    You would be well advised to look at the response to your post AND SEE WITH WHOM THE HONOURABLE BLOGMASTER IDENTIFIES

    When he says and I quote

    “… David December 7, 2019 4:58 PM

    The buffoons must be doing some thing right with you lot logged in day and night…”

    He utilizes the definite article “the” before the plural appellation buffons and embraces what you submitted as multiple, unknown parties.

    But he has identified, not as one of the many BUT THE MANY!

    So you start to see why de ole man is of the opinion that HE IS IN FACT ONE OF THEM?

    Why would he create a blog that is for the people then make a surious remark when the same people come to his site and look?

    Are you feeling me?

    That comment caused me to wonder how my Dearest SSS is and how motherhood is treating her

    @ my Dearest SSS

    God bless you and little one


  • @HA
    in case you hadn’t noticed….on the topic of the Bay St compulsory acquisition….WE are on the same page. As are several others. It sets a very dangerous precedent.

    As far as the CH case, you may continue as you wish. Bottom line….they didn’t have the evidence to convict. In fact, it seems highly questionable, whether evidence available at the time of charging, even supported a charge. Yet, in the Barbadian social context, how could they not charge him? 75% of the island already had him convicted. As you term it, part of the Barbadian Condition. Retribution for past untried offences by those of his skin tone.


  • Piece the jackass if you do not like how David BU is running his blog then take a hike amd go form your own. Trust me YOU WOULD NOT BE MISSED except by your wing man Theophilus and a few more.In my view Mrs Ram based on her treatment of bajan workers is getting what she deserves no sympathy from me whatsoever.


  • @Blogmaster
    you mean when you name your main economic program, using an acronym of the name of the lead IMF person, one cannot have a likkle ‘wiggle room’. Surely you have earned it?
    To besides, now that Sagicor is trading on the TSX, that has increased the foreign component of the NIS portfolio, which by itself creates ‘wiggle room’. In fact, that could be ‘jump up and party room’.


  • @Northern Observer

    Members of the BU household will jump up when our hair grows back.


  • Hal
    A man that is unfamiliar with the concept of existing use value+ and assumed that vacant or unused land meant a nil value is applied in this approach is telling me I don’t know what I am talking about. What I know in my little finger from knowledge and experience is more than your entire body’s worth and I can provide evidence to back up my claim too; but I enjoy the likes of you telling me I know nothing.🤣🤣🤣

    Next thing, urban regeneration is based on broad principles and driven by a masterplan or many master plans, with individual plots coming forward separately with their own design etc. The Hyatt is just one facet. Did I not say there is a Bridgetown Community Plan and an Act to incentivise development? Does that sound like a disparate, ad hoc approach? Did the government not have an investors’ conference? What you think they sold to investors? Have you ever worked on a single regeneration project? You simply think that public purpose could only be infrastructure or housing but that’s patently false and tells me you are clueless. Public purpose entails economic development too; and only a fool, the clueeless or the narrow-minded would argue that the regeneration of our capital city Bridgetown, including tourism-oriented uses, serves no public purpose. You and the Enuff opposers may continue in your high ignorance.


  • NorthernObserver
    December 7, 2019 5:55 PM

    in case you hadn’t noticed….on the topic of the Bay St compulsory acquisition….WE are on the same page. As are several others. It sets a very dangerous precedent.


    Precedent? Precedent?

    This is standard practice in Barbados.

    GOB expropriates lands as an when it is so moved and pays or not according also to how it is moved.

    Ms. Ram is actually a breath of fresh air!!

    If she is successful that will set the precedent!!


  • David
    December 7, 2019 4:31 PM

    Here is what we know:

    the government is in dire need for projects to mobilize to kickstart economic activity especially in the construction sector for obvious reasons.

    the government has gone out of its way to acquire Ms. Rams dump location to facilitate the proposed Hyatt project.

    one must assume there is some legitimacy to the transaction which will have to be revealed at some point.


    We don’t know any such thing!!!

    Four Seasons was one such project.

    .. and Halcyon and God knows how many more.

    Economy wasn’t kickstarted!!

    Why not direct these investors to completing Four Seasons … or Halcyon.

    How much NIS money is in Four Seasons?

    Leff Ms. Ram and Mr. Maloney alone let dem figure out what is what for demselves!!

    If Mr. Maloney can handle Ms. Ram, power to him, if not, learn from the experience!!


  • Miss Ram is a skeezy operator who is part of the problem in Barbados. It is good to see the public squabble with her former friends playing out. She has become a multimillionaire off the backs of black people in Barbados facilitated by the political and business class. May she rot in her current demise.


  • No sympathy from me either for Mrs. Ram based on the bd stories i have heard enough her

    However two wrongs never make a right and i would be the proverbial to sing from a hymn that states because Karma might have visited Mrs. Ram i would close my eyes to an ungodly opportunistic measure placed on Rams head by govt and say it is alright
    Hell No. A precedent set means i might be next on govt hit list
    Hell No .when i see my democratic rights being eroded i will kick up dirt come hell or high water


  • We would believe you IF your position was consistent. Do you recall you held no similar position when you found out MICHAEL CARRINGTON stole money from a 70 year old man sitting in a wheelchair?


  • David not even the weather is consistent nature made man with that such characteristic for good reason in avoidance of becoming robotic creatures

    Any how can you remind me what was my position on Carrington…sigh..double sigh
    Whatever my position it is clear that govt has set a precedent which can erode the democratic right of many
    Which brings to mind the homes situated along that corridor that are still habitable and Mia promise of having hotel stock from bridgetown to the airport.
    All when put together and stacked against the poor homeowner it wouldnt take much to figure out who would be the loser when the smoke of legal dust clears the air.


  • @ Piece

    @ Baje

    You would be well advised to look at the response to your post AND SEE WITH WHOM THE HONOURABLE BLOGMASTER IDENTIFIES

    When he says and I quote

    “… David December 7, 2019 4:58 PM

    The buffoons must be doing some thing right with you lot logged in day and night…”



  • David the spots on you now have turned to sores for you not being able to understand how the mind of a megalomaniac works


  • David look i am agreeing with u
    This might be a first
    Spot on
    Wuhloss muh belly


  • Did this one not get some shite title from Mia and UWI last year. Did it come with a diplomatic passport. Corrupt little Caribbean leaders at their ugly best. Caught at Gatwick with money.


  • The house negro baggage boys for the palace….lol


  • David
    December 7, 2019 4:31 PM

    Here is what we know:

    one must assume there is some legitimacy to the transaction which will have to be revealed at some point.


    Your certain knowledge is based on an assumption!!

    … and by your own admission!!

    This is a lunatic approach to decision making, especially since simple logic shows the assumption is flawed.

    If Parliament is unconstitutional, ie breaches the law, then how can there possibly be any legitimate act coming out of it?

    The only way any act can become legitimate is if the next constitutional Parliament legitimizes that act!!

    Mr. Skerrit in Dominica used his head unlike Ms. Mockley and Mr. Mitchell.

    He reviewed his plans from 2018 to get rid of the opposition and decided 21 – 0 can’t work.

    Better let the opposition have 3 and skirt the constitutional issue!!

    Winning a fourth term and with a 21-0 “majority” is pushing the envelope and begs the rigging question!!

    Ms. Mockley is the mock PM of a mock Government, like Mr. Mitchell.

    Plain everyday logic dictates this to be the only relevant certain knowledge in existence in this matter!!

    Ms. Mockley will have to manufacture a 27-3 result next time so this mock Parliament’s actions can be legitimized.


  • @John
    You already know, that Mrs.Ram and whomever sought to buy her land, were unable to reach a deal. Imagine if the Developers had chosen to move the project elsewhere? May still be an option.
    Seems very tenable, as the Developers apparently own no land in that immediate area.
    What then?
    Mrs Ram brings a suit against somebody, preferably nuff somebodies, claiming the Hyatt project was hijacked, and the land value has now suffered? Not precedent setting either.


  • Dear Mr Austin

    You have made some interesting points, the one that stands out for me is as follows:

    ”If the redevelopment of Bridgetown is not a single hotel, plse tell me where I can find a complete urban redevelopment proposal, which includes the Hyatt Hotel.”

    We are in a situation where the Barbados economy needs a direct input drive of development to assist in its growth. I am going to assume that the current government fully understands that, and that the Hyatt, if successful, will only represent one aspect of that growth.

    Our city is crying out for modernity. And, as much as I fail to see Hyatt being the single entity towards boasting the economy in the way that many feel it will do, we must agree that it will be a welcome addition to upgrading one part of the Bridgetown area towards a look of modernity and class.

    Our main city, if it is to be competitive on the international market, must come with a plan to attract and captivate the interest of international developers and tourist, far beyond the traditional countries that frequent our shores. If we lack vision and foresight into this, we just need to look at Dubai, Singapore and other countries who have invested heavily in developing spectacles and creative wonders of modern architecture and tech, to see how their doings have people from around the world flocking to their cities like locust desperately in search of new thing.

    Hyatt is a start, but Bridgetown needs a major redevelopment drive and, the powers that be, must commit to an urban plan of development over whatever time frame they set to see it come into fruition.

    I would hope that the party in power places the national interest far above personal interests.


  • Yeah…well my other leg is free, they can try pulling that one too.

    “More manpower and resources are needed if the Labour Department is to adequately crack down on companies that persist in having their workers operate in conditions that jeopardize their health and safety, says Minister of Labour Colin Jordan.

    This morning Jordan made the revelation while on a walkthrough of stores on Swan Street and Tudor Street.

    His comments come just days after the Liquidation Centre was condemned by health and fire officials as a safety hazard, giving rise to calls for an investigation as to whether the workers at the Bay Street store, which was compulsorily acquired by Government last month, were subjected to these conditions. When asked this morning if such alleged egregious violations could have escaped the checks and balances for any extended period, Jordan pointed to the limitations of staffing.

    “I tend to be a person who is always forward focused and one of the reasons that I am coming out myself is because there are always gaps. We have a particular problem of manpower and how we distribute manpower. In my first year on this job I would have said to the Chief Labour Officer that more officers should be on the road, but in discussion with him I had the reality check that when workers call the office they need to speak to someone. If the officers are on the road they can’t also be in the department as well,” said Jordan, noting that due to the vast number of private and public businesses, some may slip through the cracks.

    He added, “We hear from people in all kinds of areas from time to time, but resources are the issue in terms of going out to make those assessments and interventions. Some persons may ask ‘how come when something comes up Government can suddenly find persons to send?’ This is a disingenuous comment because whenever there is an emergency you always pull resources from wherever to address the emergency. However, I can assure you that we would be a bit more methodical as we approach inspections going forward.”

    The Minister promised that his officers will be ramping up site visits in the future as well as keeping their ears to the ground for complaints of poor working conditions, which may not always come through the official channels.

    “In terms of moving forward, we are going to continue these kinds of visits as a ministry. We also have to become sensitive to the areas that can be considered hot spots and by this I don’t mean information that we get through official channels, but rather noise that we may get in the atmosphere. Our intention is to do more visits in the areas where people bring things to our attention and strengthen our inspection process,” he said.

    Jordan further revealed that as Government heads into the Estimates phase, the hiring of more officers was likely to be factored into his ministry’s request for finances in the new financial year.

    “We are heading into the Estimates process and this is going to be completed early next year and these kinds of matters would be factored into how we compile the Estimates while understanding that there is not a lot of financial resources to create the perfect environment. We are not looking for perfection but we are going to do what we can, realizing that there may be gaps but we do our best to cover our bases,” he stressed.

    Earlier this week, Attorney General Dale Marshall declared that Liquidation Centre, which was owned by the Mirchandani Group of Companies, was a vermin-infested former warehouse/store that no fewer than four Government agencies have condemned as a fire hazard and a serious threat to human health. According to the Ministry of Health’s report, obtained by Barbados TODAY, heavy mould and musty odour forced environmental health officials to use personal protective equipment including masks as they entered the building.

    Inadequate ventilation, heavy residues of dust on all of the items in the building, adult mosquitoes and evidence of rodent infestation were among other findings. The environmental health officials also reported that the conditions were conducive to harbouring disease and vectors such as rodents and mosquitoes.

    The inspectors also told the Government they found evidence of improper storage practices which would prevent adequate cleaning and maintenance of the Liquidation Centre due to congestion.”


  • Most of those side street dumps in Swan and Tudor Streets that do not even haveFIRE ESCAPE EXITS…mostly operated by toxic minorities have been in existence since the 60s, Ram included, so for over 40 years both governents have never armed the labor department with the necessary tools to shut these shitholes down, but these same civil servants are well known and could be seen over decades crawling into these holes to collect their brown envelopes…to keep the shitholes operating..nice try.


  • @ Mr Hal Austin


    Take a read of this illiterate newspaper article

    “…Inadequate ventilation, heavy residues of dust on all of the items in the building, adult mosquitoes and evidence of rodent infestation were among other findings…?

    Could you explain why do they use the term “adult” mosquitoes?

    Were there also “children” mosquitoes (larvae)?

    “…The environmental health officials also reported that the conditions were conducive to harbouring disease and vectors such as rodents and mosquitoes…”

    ALSO – in addition; too; besides; as well: He was thin, and he was also tall. likewise; in the same manner: Since you’re having another cup of coffee, I’ll have one also. conjunction.


    so they repeat the same mosquitoes in the following paragraph (granted that these are not the adults, and they add rodents) and then introduce the word conducive to describe the same conditions mentioned previously.

    What is your opinion about our journalists again?


  • SirSimple SimonPresidentForLife

    @Piece the Legend December 8, 2019 6:59 AM “Could you explain why do they use the term “adult” mosquitoes?”

    I can explain.

    A mosquito just on the cusp of the age of reproduction, is neither a juvenile mosquito, nor an adult mosquito. It is kind of like an adolescent being.


  • @ SirSimple SimonPresidentForLife December 8, 2019 7:33 AM
    “A mosquito just on the cusp of the age of reproduction, is neither a juvenile mosquito, nor an adult mosquito. It is kind of like an adolescent being.”

    Since you an expert on all matters differentiating the sexes, especially when it comes to homo sapiens, could you please inform us what’s the difference between a male mosquito and a female “mosquita”?

    Are the male mosquitoes (like their human counterpart) genetically prone to violence and fight over the bloodline as in the mammalian species?

    BTW, since your Yahweh created the lowly mosquito in the garden of perfection what real purpose does the mosquito serve other than to be a source of food for other species and as a natural instrument in culling the profligately dangerous human populations?


  • @Miller

    Injecting some humour on the blog early on a Sunday morning?

    Good one!

    Liked by 1 person

  • SirSimple SimonPresidentForLife

    @Enuff December 7, 2019 2:25 PM “…the physical and economic transformation of Bridgetown if not public purpose?”

    HINT: Use the term “the physical and economic BETTERMENT of Bridgetown” becaue whatever is done it has to be to make Bridgetown BETTER.

    I am one of those people who love Bridgetown. I have seen many, many town/cities: London, Paris, new York, etc. etc, at last count 25 or more capitals and Bridgetown remains one of my favourites, for its walkability, its location on the sea, its clean beaches, Queen’s Park, its baobab tree, its public housing, including public housing across the road from an excellent beach, its historic buildings, including its places of worship and more. Keep it clean, and keep all of the buildings occupied, fix all of the sidewalks.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ Mr Gulston

    You are right about the urgent need for urban redevelopment, which is why I said instead of the badly advised austerity programme the Mottley government is following, it should have been a massive stimulus public investment programme for all the basic economic reasons.
    Again it is why I asked if she was advised by Prof Persaud to follow that austerity programme, or if he favoured the one he supports in the UK, the economic proposals of the Corbyn Labour party.
    I won’t repeat myself, but I have suggested putting the bulldozers in Nelson Street, Wellington Street and the neighbouring environs, turning it in to the heat of aa 24-hour economy.
    Also in Suttle Street, Tudor Street, Baxters Road (which the Indians and Chinese apparently are now moving in on); and, most of all Weymouth and the Transport Board site. The cost would be covered across generations
    A single hotel is not an urban redevelopment plan. In the civilised world, an urban redevelopment plan is a joined up plan, not piece by piece nonsense or badly drafted legislation. It is pushing at an open door.
    Lying to or misleading parliament is a resignation issue under the so-called Westminster model. Read the story of John Profumo. It is my case that the Mottley has not come clean with the people or with parliament on the Hyatt issue. What is the public interest principle involved? That should be an impeachable offence. Can we impeach a prime minister?.

    @ Piece

    I have great respect for journalists, what ever their experience. There are also great mistakes by UK journalists which I also scream at.


  • If the barbados journalist was not so much hand tied to govt the question of what “is of public interest” they would asked of govt
    The govt interpretation does not meet the standard and approved test applicable to the people interest when govt acquires land under the laws of acquisition and transfer the land to outside foreign investors for the sole purpose towards their investment
    If govt purpose is to improve the landscape in an rundown area with the intent of handing property or parcel of land to an outside interest
    Govt should have first involved the citizens by posting such intent within media sending letters of intent to the people living in that area and last but not least having town hall meetings
    All of which would be recorded for public record interest
    But what we see in this ongoing malaise is an uncontrollable govt having a belief that 30-0 mandate means doing as they dam place
    Public records are necessary and a real and necessary source of information for the people


  • @ SirSimple SimonPresidentForLife December 8, 2019 8:59 AM
    “Keep it clean, and keep all of the buildings occupied, fix all of the sidewalks.”

    Well said, Sir SS !

    Bridgetown does not need any 18 stor(e)y tower of Babel to make it attractive to visitors.

    On the contrary, its World Heritage Site status would be diluted as a place of attraction.

    How can you talk about tourism being the main engine of economic survival while you are planning to throw a spanner in the very works which act as the only ‘magnate’ to tourists visiting the place?

    What Bridgetown wants as a course of immediate and practical medication to revive its diminishing fortunes are not tall skyscraper monstrosities blocking out both sunlight and fresh air but a planned programme of upgrade and upkeep.

    Visitors to Barbados, generally from a metropolis, do not look forward to seeing the same type of concrete jungle in the tropics from which they are trying to escape for a welcoming and relaxing break on a small island. Barbados is not Paris, Rome or Venice or even Kuala Lumpur, Singapore or Dubai.

    With its ‘new’ world old charm why not go for a marina with modern facilities and amenities to ‘exploit’ its comparative advantage as a strategically located first port of call to the calm and beautiful Caribbean sea and with nearby lovely beaches to boot?

    How about a massive sprucing up of its ‘old-style architecture’ buildings and the cleaning of the alleys and ugly lots as you recommended as part of a ‘planned’ programme of proper public hygiene practices right across Barbados?

    Why can’t the same agencies responsible for public hygiene and, at the end of the political games, public sanitation start in their own backyard on Jemmotts Lane by removing the growing rat breeding station whose ‘adult’ population are using the abandoned vehicles as penthouses for their baby crèches?

    How could a rat breeding ward like the one at the Liquidation vermin hospital have continued to operate right in the heart of a small city listed as a World Heritage site without the active connivance of the health and safety authorities if not with the known contrivance of these same corrupt rats; both bureaucratic in stripes and political in colour(s) in receipt of their brown envelopes?


  • Ram is notorious in Nigeria, she even set up a store at her filthy hotel to siphon off the Nigerian student’s money…anyone coming to the island to do anything, the first thing the skunks do is send them to that filthy hole…Bajans have no shame.

    “Ever since 90 Nigerian students set foot in Barbados in December to pursue a nine-month study programme at the Barbados Community College (BCC) in tourism and hospitality, their presence has been shrouded in controversy. Among the main contentious issues were complaints of poor accommodation and bad food at Casa Grande Hotel at Oldburyin St Philip, and concerns over the manner in which the local project manager was spending the US$750,000 transferred to her for the Delta State Empowerment Programme here.”


  • Spot on, Miller and Simple Simon! That is ALL Bridgetown needs! Barbados should remain Barbados, just cleaner and neater. And Bridgetown should remain Bridgetown, similarly cleaner and neater. The Barbados I fell in love with when I was dragged here from England as a child had its own irresistible island charm. And so did its people, maddening as they are sometimes.

    Improving Barbados does not entail seeking to compete with countries with whom we can never compete and should not even wish to become.

    I recently took my son on an island tour because he really needed to see Barbados through older eyes (he had not been for a few years) and I realised that there is much in this country to love. We just have to take care of it better than we have been doing. It is not as Herculean a task as we make it out to be. All we have to do is break it down into parishes.


  • So, if some of us love old Barbados, does that make us nostalgic or appreciative? Some of us do not want skyscrapers and SUVs and online shopping and greasy unhealthy fast food and too many foreign restaurants and too much partying.
    We just want our old Barbados back. Is that too much to ask?


  • @ Hal
    @ Donna
    @ Miller

    The destruction of the country’s charm did not start yesterday. We had no building codes; only “certain”properties were protected by the National Trust; we refused to honor those who really made contributions- almost any party higher up is guaranteed a Knighthood ; we watched Bridgetown collapse while we developed Warrens; refused to replace broken underground water mains; paid little attention to our marine life.Our agriculture bid on ruins.
    Pray tell me if any one of you can honestly say that there is any desire or developmental plans to halt the systematic destruction of what you call the old Barbados charm.
    It will take a radical departure from our current thinking. Are we now into deluding ourselves. That old charm is gone. Welcome to little Brooklyn.


  • Should read agriculture “base” not bid.


  • Dear Mr Austin

    I cited similar targeted areas for demolition in my second contribution on this topic but deleted those parts to provide a simple comment. However, since you cited what I consider to be a move towards major change, there comes a time when one must make serious decisions against the backdrop of noise for the greater good.

    To this end, I indicated (along with some of your mentions) that all those buildings on the left and right of the harbour going towards Probyn Street bus stand that includes, if my memory serves me correctly, Pelican Village, the bus and mini van stands, post office, Cheapside (left from harbour); Trevors way, Bridgetown Fishing Complex, Old BMC building and slaughter house, Fisheries Division, building housing an assortment of shops and businesses (right from harbour road side) should be demolished.

    The name areas you cited should have, indeed, long been demolished. They are prime areas for redevelopment. There are those who will argue on the basis of the poor, but what they need to understand is that it takes people with money to bring about infrastructural changes. The poor have no means to bring about development for greater good and, must, unfortunately, ”pay the price for progress.”

    I share your concerns relative to the vague public relations optics presented by the party in power. Where we will part ways and disagree is on the subject of the austerity. But, that is a discussion for another time.



  • “Welcome to little Brooklyn.” can’t afford to rent an apartment in certain parts of Brooklyn these days, not even in the Flatbsh area, the revitalization and renaissance efforts are in full swing and the Manhattan crowd is moving back in….years now because they can no longer afford a box for 10K per month..

    … can’t compare to the degradation that now has the island in a vice grip due to systemic neglect…everyone (all the leaders and tiefing lawyers) wanted million dollar bank accounts, big SUV rides…huge luxury apartment buildings up and down the coast to rent out to tourists and whomever have deep pockets for their own gratiication and self pretense, huge mansions, beachfront properties to hold WILD PARTIES…multiple offshore bank accounts and the list goes on.

    ..not one of them thought of the people who elected them or the island’s future, they thought that long talk and lip service would fix everything…..guess they were all so very wrong, now they can’t come out and say much outside of more BAREFACED LIES…lol


  • Mr Gulston,

    The environs of Nelson Street and Suttle Street, Barbarees Hill down to Eagle Hall, came out of the abolition of slavery. As the newly freed slaves abandoned the plantations in St John and St Philip and came to town, they settle in what we now call the old villages and town (Rouen, Licorish Village, Carrington Village, Ivy, Bird Hill, Haggatt Hall) on the one side and Eagle Hall, Black Rock, etc on the other. Nothing much has changed since then.
    To ease the overflow, the Adams government created a few housing estates, which were revolutionary in their time. We need to take the country forward in to the 21st century as we have proposed above.
    Every graduate of the university is a potential homeowner. Yet, for some reason, both the government and private sector have failed to meet the potential needs of this market. We have failed to develop a capital market because of the poverty of ideas.
    The hysterical noise that comes out religiously is who is going to pay for this development. Two things: by having sovereign of our currency we can print money; the only risk from that is a liquidity risk and the subsequent asset price inflation and that can be managed through such devices as banks’ capital reserves.
    The other funding mechanism is by buying off plan so that the cash received can pay for developments. In any case, the debt for such a development can be paid off over the generations and the plan can be carried out over a ten-year period. For example, Britain paid its final Marshall Plan debt under the Blair government. As I have said before, we waste Weymouth. Every time I see it I just ahake my head.
    We also need to develop indigenous businesses; for example, the biggest in terms of numbers black-controlled businesses are law firms, but if you look at their business models they are still stuck in the 1930s, many in little rooms with piles of paper files.
    We need large regional law firms with offices in every CARICOM nation, providing a comprehensive service (law, accountancy, business consultancies) with Chinese walls between sectors.
    We need alternative funding to the banks and we can do this by monetising commercial business operations. I can go on, but you get my drift.
    Or look at my trade; it is old hat just providing newspapers while leaving the wider markets opened to be exploited. A regional financial paper, for example, print or digital (I proposed such a business to a senior Jamaican businessman some years ago and he brushed it aside. Which was strange since he came to see me for a working breakfast). But news


  • By the way, you cannot have austerity and an economic stimulus. It is one or the other.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ WURA

    Haven’t you heard . We are not only punching above our weight. According to one blogmaster, we are going to successfully complete the IMF program and then create a whole industry, teaching other countries how to successfully negotiate IMF programs.
    That is the type of arrogance and delusion that we carry and it comes from being fed “barefaced “ lies for the last half century. It comes from propping up the Duopoly. It comes from blaming the struggling poor people for every thing that is wrong with the country. It comes from giving the private sector a pass.
    Stay tuned for more brilliant ideas and the new industries that we will be creating in the near future.

    @ Hal
    Don’t waste your time here with such great ideas. Contact the IMF and just maybe your ideas may at least get a hearing. Dey running tings right now Remember : you are just Hal Austin from the Ivy who live in Englan and you don’t even come back to Barbados for a vacation . And furthermore you up dey in englan living well under a duopoly too. I don’t know why dey don’t ban yuh from BU.


  • Look how quick govt got ownership of the liquidation centre
    Meanwwhile squatters Row still remain occupied by illegal inhabitants
    Mia also had the mitigated gall to.offer the squatters money to move
    But in Ram case she gets nada
    What could be missing here


  • @ William

    You can only try.


  • If you want to see a city near us that has developed without building eyesores to do, so I suggest you look at Willemstad the capital of Curacao


  • @William

    The cold like it knawing at your understanding. You take a comment laced with sarcasm and running with it? Steuspe.

    Another thing, what makes an idea good?


  • “It comes from blaming the struggling poor people for every thing that is wrong with the country. It comes from giving the private sector a pass.”

    William…. they are vicious..everyone’s eyes were glued to the marijuana blog recently and this little twit, someone says he is Mia’s cousin in charge of the marijuana trade on the island, he decides to boast and boast and when someone asked him certain questions he claimed…THAT IS WHAT BAJANS WANT…and when asked, did they take a survey to analyze the replies and make an informed decision about what the people wanted, the dummy did not even answer…even worse, when told that other countries were seriously legalizing or had already legalize, this thing for want of a better word declares, well Barbados government has no such plans and that is what Bajans get for wanting to be different….

    people are still STUNNED by that shite…STUNNED…the blog has no recovered since..

    that is why some people already made a preemptive strike on those assholes

    it will only get worse, Bajans really have to watch that bunch, your safety and financial security depends on it..and not to mention the FUTURES OF YOUR DESCENDS….they do not have the majority black populations interests at heart..AT ALL…

    house negros in all their stain and glory..


  • And as for the leeches and parasites in the private sector, all bajans got to do is STOP SPENDING THEIR MONEY WITH THEM…and shut all of them to hell down. See how quickly they all run off the island when they cannot suck on the people anymore.


  • @ David
    Stay hot my brother . Drink plenty water.


  • “As I have said before, we waste Weymouth. Every time I see it I just ahake my head.”

    sometimes i wonder about you, were you in Barbados in 1970 when they had that flood, i doubt it or you would never, ever consider Weymouth as any housing solution.

    so when are you returning to Africa…i can just hear you in West Africa with that brit accent…


  • SirSimple SimonPresidentForLife

    Lloyd P Gulston December 8, 2019 3:13 PM “all those buildings on the left and right of the harbour going towards Probyn Street bus stand that includes, if my memory serves me correctly, Pelican Village, the bus and mini van stands, post office, Cheapside (left from harbour); Trevors way, Bridgetown Fishing Complex, Old BMC building and slaughter house, Fisheries Division, building housing an assortment of shops and businesses (right from harbour road side) should be demolished. The name areas you cited should have, indeed, long been demolished. The poor have no means to bring about development for greater good and, must, unfortunately, ”pay the price for progress.”

    I just hope that they do not do what was done in Salvador deBahia, also a World Heritage City where the “powers” felt that the areas where the poor lived should be demolished, and that the poor must pay the price for progress.

    Cities are not only about buildings, cities are not even principally about buildings and certainly cities are not only about new buildings. Cities are PRINCIPALLY ABOUT PEOPLE. The buildings in a city MUST SERVE THE CITI–ZENS, anything else and we WILL get it very, very wrong.

    Dead buildings, dead streets, dead parks, no life, why would anybody want to come there?


  • The comical aspect of this whole Ms Ram fiasco, & Hyatt, is that win or lose, the lady will be long dead & gone before she sees any money! Remember the episode up at Warrens??

    The greedy lawyers involved will be laughing their way to the Banks, cause you can be sure they will get their fees first …. using the fee structure of those like Hal Gollop….lol.


  • @ WARU

    You are correct:

    Garbage issues behind rat sighting

    PURITY BAKERIES says a rodent problem it is experiencing is nothing new, and is blaming it on the sporadic collection of garbage.

    This is according to the company in response to two videos making the rounds on social media showing a rat between baking pans in Lower Collymore Rock, St Michael facility.

    “Purity Bakeries, like every other food business, has experienced challenges in relation to the rodent population around our facility. The national issues related to garbage collection have compounded these challenges,” said Purity in a statement on its Facebook page yesterday afternoon after the DAILY NATION had earlier contacted general manager Ralph Holder for a comment.


  • @ ks December 8, 2019 9:17 PM
    “The comical aspect of this whole Ms Ram fiasco, & Hyatt, is that win or lose, the lady will be long dead & gone before she sees any money!”

    That’s what you think!

    That cheque would be the fastest one ever cut by the Accountant General.
    The payment would be from taxpayers’ money that has no owner.

    The sad thing about it is that none of the outstanding liabilities due to the Crown or State-owned enterprises like the BWA would be taken into account in preparing that instrument of payment needed to help a long-time friend out of serious financial difficulties.

    It’s high time the Ram reap the last big dividend due on her massive investment in the ‘leading’ personalities of both political parties over the years whether they were winners or losers in the electoral zero sum game.


  • Your suspicion has some currency Miller. You will recall Maloney was paid for work at the GROTTO from the Industrial Housing Fund. There was the unusual transaction at the BWA concerning the construction of BWA headquarters with Innotech that caught the attention of the Auditor General.


  • told that ass that no lawyer was going to go on FACEBOOK…a community of billions of people to expose something like that…unless he or she has evidence, no lawyer worth his or her salt is that dumb and i do not defend lawyers UNLESS…i know they are right…

    now were i that lawyer, i would drop a lawsuit in their asses, just because….


  • As usual, de ole man NOT BEING BRIGHT LIKE WUNNA, causing I left school at 11, cannot run wid wunna big boys..

    So lemme axe wunna a question!


    All uh wunna, after wunna ask WTR is the purpose of my stoopid question, gine say Senator Caswell Franklyn


    It would be Senator Franklyn ‘s designate in the PdP WHO DOES NOT HAVE ANY “NATIONAL CURRENCY” @ 2019!!!

    And what de FVUCK de ole man talking bout?

    I gine explain!


    So de Caswell designate is being pulled along on his coattails!

    Den, de next RH ting dat de PdP is to do is to have dis Shadow Minister WHOM CASWELL FRANKLYN HAS BEEN GROOMING, start going to RH stores, and businesses etc saying to people,

    “look, de BLP out heah tekking way people property for health reasons etc. We understand how you as a business owner will feel.

    But wunna dun know dat Caswell is a man deeply versed in Employee and Employer Rights!

    What we are doing is working with Employers and employees to create independent records of compliance for….blah blah blah”

    Wunna unnerstan de ole man campaign strategy?

    And how dis is promoting de PdP and its unknown candidates nationally?

    But remember dat Piece the Legend ent bright (savvy) like wunna ok?


  • @ the Honourable Blogmaster your assistance please with an item here for Senator Caswell Franklyn


  • @Wru,
    Hopefully this is an eye opener for the person who was attacking you.

    It was a classic example of people willing to carry water for others even though they do no know the full circumstances.

    Hopefully he/she learnt something and will not just sit there with a water bucket.

    You are doing a great job of showing that the interests of the majority population often plays the second fiddle. So continue beating your drums.


  • So nice, I post it twice

    Hopefully this is an eye opener for the person who was attacking you.

    It was a classic example of people willing to carry water for others even though they do no know the full circumstances.

    Hopefully he/she learnt something and will not just sit there with a water bucket.

    You are doing a great job of showing that the interests of the majority population often plays the second fiddle. So continue beating your drums.


  • Theo…i know you mean well…but that is what fowls unable to think for themselves do…they will come out again to COVER UP CRIMES AGAINST THEMSELVES AND THEIR PEOPLE….it’s an ugly residual colonial stain and reminder of the DAMAGED BLACK MIND…

    .in yardfowls…IT’S even WORSE….they do it even while knowing that it will kill them and their families in the process….very, very ugly to watch…they do it their whole lives in self-destruct mide…why do you think the useless pokiticians are so sureof themselves in their cirruption and evil…they get no resistance.

    The logic is because we expose lawyers for wrong doing….when a lawyer has the public’s best interest at heart…we should not have his or her back…and that makes perfect sense to brain damaged fools..

    ….the intent…protect government corruption and bribetaking that destroys Barbados and bajans……at all cost.

    So look out for more of same.


  • Hal
    When the pierhead project was conceptualised were there not also jointly funded IADB projects for Cats Castle, Garden Land and Greenfields? You just string words and phrases together based on what you have read (sadly not enough), not what you have actually done or understand. Yes you interviewed a man, so what? How could one carry out urban regeneration without assembling different parcels of land to ensure a “joined up plan”? How could land assembly be achieved without public acquisition, unless land owners agree thru private treaty? How could urban regeneration happen without private developers? What is urban regeneration without an aspect of economic development? In the case I cited, the Council could have acquired the land for the pedestrian and cycle infrastructure only, but it also provided for an expansion to the shopping centre. Why?It is important to note that the shopping centre developer was not contributing to any housing or public park etc. The shopping centre owner could have bought the land (as you argue so vociferously for Maloney to have done) and expanded; and the Council would have secured similar public purpose through the Section 106, in other words planning obligations/gain.


  • @ Enuff

    I am out of any further discussion on this issue with you. You are too far ahead of me on this matter. I am not that bright. Sorry. I give up.


  • Barbados has been FIGHTING BLACK POWER and Black enrichment from the 1970s, always beating down their own black people and fighting postive change to keep a stinking racist, colonial slave system alive to rob their own people…disgusting and repulsive negros in parliament have always done that..


  • BTW…this article is compliments of our brother who deserted us on BU..Vincent Haynes, he has a nice blog on FB..


  • Hal
    You would have to exit stage left. I would too, if I were completely pulverised and exposed as talking nonsense by someone who, according to you, does not know what they are talking about.🤣🤣🤣


  • @ Enuff

    You got it in one. You are now my new urban regeneration hero. Great bloke. Politely, no more comment on the subject.


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: Logo

You are commenting using your 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