Political Rounders

https://www.economist.com/sites/default/files/images/2018/06/articles/main/20180616_IRD001.jpg

The US presidential election is less that 80 days away. The blogmaster has always been intrigued how Americans select political candidates through a system of primaries and caucuses. Compared to the process in Barbados where the Executive Council of the the two main political parties are known to have vetoed candidates nominated by constituency councils, it begs a question…

…For election integrity purposes, the candidate selected should be the candidate with the most popular support within the party. In some systems, political party bosses, or small cliques within the party, select their nominees. The nominee is then beholden to the bosses who would expect favours and other preferential treatment. This can also be true of large donors to parties who may try to ‘buy’ candidates (for more on this see Campaign Financing)…

Ace.org

In recent years concerns have been expressed whether the current system operated by the two main political parties serve to produce the best governments. The idea a handful of political partisans can sit in a school on a Sunday evening to select a candidate based on questionable criteria is not ideal. The recent example of former Minister Denis Lowe in the Christ East Constituency and not so recent of the Barbados Labour Party widely publicized case of Maria Agard are classic examples.

The concern is that these political parties – some suggest cabals – make decisions that have far reaching consequences for the country. Has the time come to democratize the process in a real way is the rhetorical question. Should a more broad based approach to candidate selection be adopted. The present system has given rise to a political class comfortable with an arrangement of party recycling at acceptable intervals. If we do not find a way for the political system to ‘regenerate’ there will be the inevitable result. The poorakey debate in our parliament, refusal by the DLP and BLP to enact transparency legislation and the lack of political will to fix Auditor General’s concerns over the years are three performance measures a discerning Barbadian can use to evaluate the performance of the political directorate in the post Independence period.

We have a political system that convinces a prime minister during a pandemic to practice Machiavellian politics.

We have a political system that permitted a member of parliament to switch to the ‘opposition side’ in the twinkling of an eye. A lack of system integrity some say for a candidate who days earlier ran on a government ticket.

In the 2018 general election the BLP gained 72.83% of the vote, DLP 22.10%, Solutions 2.72%. Has the first past the post system outlived its relevance with alternatives to be considered, proportional representation; preferential voting?

…No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.…

Winston Churchill, 11 November 1947

A man made system is not perfect therefore the system of government we practice is not perfect.

In an imperfect system the citizenry – the collective – must be sufficiently educated to be aware of the importance of our responsibilities. The buck stops with us.

A country gets the government it deserves.

We must be the disrupting force.

The political class is a mirror image.

The question: How do we inculcate traits and behaviours in the citizenry required to be the disruptive force- the last check and balance- to ensure our government commits to an approach of continuous renewal?

50 comments

  • David

    The good points made should go to the centre of the whole system, not just a matter of politics.

    Just like how economics as currently constructed can’t serve all the people all the time neither political ever will. Indeed, neither was established so to.

    Therefore, something is fundamentally wrong with modern societies.

    Like

  • @Pacha

    On a blog one has to deal with these types of matters in bite sizes. We live in a time where the average Joe is unable to understand how dysfunction in the political governance system is a structural fault that is responsible for all the outcomes we quibble daily here and elsewhere. If we remediate these matters there is a chance the newshoot will feed a new kind of ethos how we must do our business given its weight of influence on the whole.

    Like

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ David BU
    You traveled this route before and said almost exactly the same thing. I suggest we do a complete re-calibration. Is it the system or us? Is there some thing superior in the American system that you and one other always reference it? If so ,why do those living in the USA system question it?
    I think you need to examine more closely the system of selecting candidates. There are a variety of systems but the local constituency groups have a lot of say.They also vote on polling day.

    Like

  • @Vincent

    Take a deep breath and have a reread.

    Like

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ David BU
    Having taken your advice, I am still lost. May be the message is not for me. I will move on.

    Like

  • @Vincent

    That is fine, we know you are a believer in allowing things to revolve versus disruption.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ David Bu
    Yes. I am a piece o’ Darwin in that sense. I prefer the systems to evolve, given the economic ,political and physical environments within which we have to live.
    I would like to underline the fact that. in most cases, in both parties ,the names eventually selected, originate in the local party branches.

    Like

  • Yes, the Executive Councils with all their powers, have occasionally failed to get their “pick” declared as the party’s candidate. This only occurs in those constituencies where the Branch leadership is not compromised.

    From where I stand though, the problem is the silent manythat simply can’t be bothered, who allow the vocal few involved in the “Party” thing, to select all the tunes. I guess that means I agree with certain blog masters today. However, this disruption thing that he keeps harping on ain’t gine happen anytime soon.

    The masses are always preoccupied with day to day issues and too many look to the said same political class for survival. It has evolved thus and so it shall remain until there is no need for anyone to wonder; “weh de next food coming from?”

    Ask yourself, why the best and brightest in the “Party” are always found representing predominately working-class constituencies?

    Liked by 1 person

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    Mr Blogmaster, @VC is correct … whenever u travel this road you say ” exactly the same thing” which is UNSUUBSTANTIATED by the stark evidence of current political life. One day I look forward to your well-reasoned argument in support of your thesis…that:

    1-”We have a political system that permitted a member of parliament to switch to the ‘opposition side’ in the twinkling of an eye. A lack of system integrity some say for a candidate who days earlier ran on a government ticket.”

    Your argument is not sustained … the lack of system integrity you lament is in fact DEMOCRACY at its best… in this guise it was a peaceful and ‘effective’ means of completing the supposed mandate to have a viable opposition. Whether it happened a ‘few’ days after the election where this new Leader of the Opposition was a recent acolyte of the PM or took place after a few thousand days as the case of Richie Haynes who also ‘crossed over’ to become LoO is actually ‘irrelevant’. In the context of DEMOCRATIC governance it worked as the ‘people decreed’……AND, those ‘people’ used their power to democratically express their electoral displeasure and eventually disposed of Haynes’ effort … surely they will have that ‘recall’ opportunity soon enough again.

    So I may be mistaken as seeing this as reasoned system integrity!

    2.”In the 2018 general election the BLP gained 72.83% of the vote, DLP 22.10%, Solutions 2.72%. Has the first past the post system outlived its relevance with alternatives to be considered, proportional representation; preferential voting?”

    Explain how proportional representation here in Bim would have given PROPER ventilation to the will of Bajans who clearly wanted to be RID of the DLP!… Again, your wonderful theory is devoid of the political REALITY … democracy once again prevailed perfectly….
    Had the DLP been given seven proportionally designated seats and the GP party one that would have been all hunky-dory theoretically awesome and absolutely WRONG practically. Bajans did not want anyone from EITHER party in the assembly, seems to me!

    Long story shortened, @David the political game as currently legislated in Bim has WORKED. As you noted it’s not perfect but I challenge you to clarify how any other methodology would have produced IMPROVED results.

    And the much maligned US system is no worst or better as @VC suggests. The primary system is merely the ‘constituency councils’ reformatted… it’s where the candidate gets the official imprimatur and just as a local party executive council can thwart the will of the constituents, so too can (and did) the executive council or the Dem/Repub party machine scuttle upcoming hopefuls.

    For every AOC (Alexander Ocasio Cortez) or Jamaal Bowman who both beat established and entrenched current representatives in primaries and thus defeated the party machine executive there are hundreds of vanquished others… those new to political shenanigans will not know the history (again in NYC) of how Charlie Rangel’s as one example, successfully beat back many primary challenges late in his career… with the support of the party machine ‘constituency council’!

    All that to say that the ONLY perfect fit for this thing we call democracy is that we must adapt and fit method to purpose to ACHIEVE or goals to ‘freely’ decide the ‘will’ of the people.

    No one method will work perfectly (forever) as that is NOT supported by governance history. Nor can we expect that we can so easily NEGATE the influence of powerful cliques, ‘vocal pressure groups’ or wealthy donors. The candidate is ALWAYS beholden to someone or some ideology… all we can do force every candidate to balance those interest to the broader good of the community 80% or more of his/her decisions…. and vote them out when they don’t.

    I don’t want a candidate that will vote liberal ‘green’ regardless of real deleterious societal impact just as I don’t want a conservatist who wants to mine for fossil fuels regardless of the environmental problems. I need a Realist (Dem, BLP or Repub) to make practical and reasoned decisions.

    I gone.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @Dee Word

    Nonsense!

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    Lol 😂 .. be a lil more expressive bro… I told quite detailedly (although nonsensically so) where ur argument lacked ooomph…

    Do me the honour … break down my folly to me….

    Lata.

    Liked by 1 person

  • re I don’t want a conservatist who wants to mine for fossil fuels regardless of the environmental problems.
    what exactly are the environmental problems. due to mining of fosil fuels
    how does carbon dioxide impact negatively on the environment?

    Like

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ dpD at 4:16 PM

    I like this intervention very much. It was well reasoned and articulated. We live in an imperfect world and for good reason. It triggers changes and removes complacency.

    Like

  • @Vincent

    How was it well reasoned if one week you have a man on a political platform singing the praises of the BLP agenda and the next week crossing the floor? Do you understand why we have growing voter apathy? The man even attended his swearing in by wearing a red shirt.

    Steuspe!

    Like

  • People are messy! Life is messy! Democracy will be messy. There is no perfection. No perfect people. No perfect system. Life is not fair.

    My grandmother used to say, “Life is a struggle and a puzzle.”

    What say we accept that and keep on struggling and puzzling!

    Liked by 1 person

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ David Bu
    In a democracy one can change one’s mind in a second. Democracy guarantees freedom of thinking and freedom of action within certain boundaries. I am of the view that his action went a long way in preserving our democratic form of governance.
    Since crossing the floor has he “unsung” the praises of the items outlined in the manifesto?

    Like

  • Was not the crossing the ultimate political sacrifice in furtherance of the BLP cause?

    Liked by 1 person

  • @Vincent

    What matters is not Atherley crossing the floor, what matters is that the rules need to prevent it because an act of crossing the floor is a betrayal of the vote. He will find out the consequences of his action come next election. It is not about him changing his mind, it is about what the electorate thinks of the act.

    By the way why did he change his mind?

    Like

  • Since crossing the floor has he “unsung” the praises of the items outlined in the manifesto?
    (~_~)
    Far from it. In fact we have even had occasions where some senators take contrary position to their boss and vote against bills he supported in the lower house.
    As GP would regularly ask, “Ah lie”?

    Like

  • Vincent Codrington

    @David Bu

    It matters to you. And that is one opinion . It does not matter to those people who understand the import of what he did and why.
    @ Raw Bake
    Rev Atherley is not their boss. They are the nominations of the leader of the Opposition to the Senate. Boss mentality is still very present in Barbados 2020, I notice. I am sure Rev Atherley is on record as to how he expects them to vote.
    It is not my concern to know why parliamentarians do what they do. It is my duty to understand. I expressed an opinion on this several times already on this Blog. I am not inclined to repeat.

    Like

  • @dpD

    When a political party spends its resources on a candidate and he/she gains the confidence/acceptance of party supporters………. who subsequently elect him/her to be their parliamentary representative……. and that candidate for some reason decides to resign from the party, I believe there should be a by-election.

    Joseph Atherley, for example, ‘ran and won on a BLP ticket.’ In other words, he OFFERED himself as the BLP’s candidate for St. Michael West, the constituents ACCEPTED, hence the reason why he received 3,214 votes. Atherley subsequently ‘crossed the floor’ because he wasn’t chosen to be a member of Mottley’s Cabinet…… which can only be described as his own selfish reasons.

    But what about 72.34% of the 4,184 St. Michael West voters that had reasonable expectations Atherley would continue representing them as a member of the BLP?

    Why should those voters have to wait until 2023 to “democratically express their electoral displeasure,” when they should have been given another opportunity, through a by-election, to choose whether or not they wanted Atherley to represent them, either as an independent or a member of the PdP….. or a candidate from the DLP, UPP, SB or BLP?

    I also remember sometime in 1989, when Dr. Haynes along with Peter Miller, Edgar Bourne and Richard Byer resigned from the DLP to form the NDP. Because the newly established political party had one more member than the BLP, Haynes was sworn in as Opposition Leader.

    Supposed 15 over zealous BLP parliamentarians decide to resign from the party and established the ‘Barbados Liberation Party?’ Doesn’t this create a situation where the individual who exalts him/herself as leader of the BLO becomes PM? Would this be fair to constituents who would have had reasonable expectations those members would have continued representing them as members of the BLP?

    Allow me to introduce another scenario. Supposed 16 disgruntled BLP parliamentarians decided to join the DEMS? How would this situation “have given PROPER ventilation to the will of Bajans who clearly wanted to be RID of the DLP?”

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    Mr Blogmaster I see that you can jump up and down hysterically but can’t sit calmly and reason 😂!

    You refuse to answer my query or that of @VC.

    How is DEMOCRACY NOT at work in your protestations. Stop the haranguing and start debating rationally.

    Democracy means freedom to choose and as the dear lady said that can be messy!

    People change parties all the time… sometimes their supporters ‘change with them’ as in still reelect them and other times not.

    The fact that Atherley attended his swearing in and then decided/accepted the role to lead the opposition is a messy but absolutely clear sign that DEMOCRACY worked.

    You are caught up in the optics and ANTCIS of political posturing and therefore to blinded to see the obvious flaw in your reasoning about the ‘system integrity’

    INTEGRITY in this case means that something is fair and just with a transparency that can stand a societal test of fairness… please explain to the blog what was UNFAIR and UNJUST to the Bajan populace to have a duly elected representative designated as LoO.

    Give us reason, sir not hyperventilation!

    That is WHAT democracy demands is it not!😎.

    And frankly it’s tiring and monotonous to hear of “..growing voter apathy”.

    WHO elects the politicians David… Martians or inhabitants from Saturn?

    Let’s cuts this continuous BS… if we are lazy, corrupt and indifferent or greedy, licentious and arrogant then who the hell are we going to elect if not people like us.

    How in hell’s name can a pathological liar and pussy grabber be in the WH unless a majority of people find such a person likeable and ELECTABLE… and why do they!

    Well because a lot of them are liars and actually dont mind playing with kittens that’s not their own to pet.

    Please do us the favor and cut the platitudes and catch phrase palaver and cook up some actually meat of reason.

    @Doc re:. …what exactly are the environmental problems. due to mining of fosil fuels[…] how does carbon dioxide impact negatively on the environment?

    The “green” debate is deep and long … and I surely can tell you nothing on that about which u do not already know. Suffice to say that anyone who desires oil riches to the extent of foregoing environmental concerns about drling in pristine wildlife areas is not the type person for whom I would vote nor would I vote for liberal who purports that any expansive “green deal” means NO drilling in almost most areas or no fracking or basically all prohibitions of supposedly anything from big industry that supposedly damage the environment .

    @VC, thank you re “well reasoned”.
    The Blogmaster has been at this so long that he perceives that he can dismiss anything that doesn’t meet his likability scale with a scathing put down like “nonsense”.

    It’s quite amusing really… he puts up lovely palaver and when you engage him on it he attacks you rather disrespectfully and utters not a word of debate rebuttal… ah well that the new norm I suppose!

    Liked by 1 person

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    @Artax, you may have your opinions about ”a political party spending its resources on a candidate” and the need for a by-election in the event of a ‘floor crossing’ but the law of the land says NOTHING like that… so unless it’s changed our democracy is working EXACTLY as intended and MPs can cross the floor as they see fit. The electorate can act at the next election.

    But this is a democracy so if that’s a burden too hard to carry then citizens can seek a constitutional change or protest so aggressively as to force political action.

    And the same applies to your ‘supposition’ about ”15 over zealous BLP parliamentarians (resigning)” to form a new party. In very simple constitutional terms you are describing one extraordinary result of a ‘no confidence’ motion in the PM… the constitution ALLOWS that…so ABSOLUTELY it’s legal and thus ‘fair’ to all citizens.

    We elect MPs who are a team under a leader and if she loses their support so grandly then the legal-wheels of democracy would grind into action… and if she allowed then to usurp her power like that then she would be deserving… realistically, however, one would expect her face-saving request to the GG to dissolve parliament.

    Messy… but our democracy at work!

    And LOL…politics is REALISM NOT FANTASY! On what basis would any astute BLP politician or group of them entertain your scenario of forming a nexus with the FALED Dems? That would be political folly plain and simple.

    And @David… still awaiting your enlightenment. I’ll remember this exchange of “nonsense” next time you criticize POTUS for his ridiculous broadside which lack any substantive reasoning! 🙂 You are truly a very ‘funny’ arbiter who initiates debates of which he has limited bandwidth interest to close-out!

    I gone now though!

    Liked by 1 person

  • Okay Vincent,
    I concede that he is not their “boss”. It is not like they are beholden to him fuh a pay pack when de week comes. I meant “Boss” in the sense that as “Opposition Senators, they are not meant to beIndependent Senators.

    Now if you are implying that the Rev expected, and exhorted them to vote as they see fit, then I am left to ponder his commitment and your view that “his action went a long way in preserving our democratic form of governance.”

    I mean, how does that work with a Leader that is serious about performing his role as the official opposition. I saying one thing and “my” Senators saying something else. Two different hymn sheets in one choir?

    How dat gine look?

    Like

  • @Artax
    Remember it is the candidate one is voting for NOT the party. Or so the story goes.
    Hence it is the Person crossing the floor, not the party.
    I know that only a handful of people actually vote for the person and not the Party under whose umbrella they offer themselves.
    But this the dilemma?

    Liked by 1 person

  • Mr Blogmaster I see that you can jump up and down hysterically but can’t sit calmly and reason 😂!

    You refuse to answer my query or that of @VC.

    How is DEMOCRACY NOT at work in your protestations. Stop the haranguing and start debating rationally.

    Democracy means freedom to choose and as the dear lady said that can be messy!….(Quote)

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ dpD

    RE: “And LOL…politics is REALISM NOT FANTASY! On what basis would any astute BLP politician or group of them entertain your scenario of forming a nexus with the FAILED Dems? That would be political folly plain and simple.

    You don’t know……… unless of course you have the uncanny ability to read people’s
    minds.

    Politicians are known to make decisions for their own self interest and not for their constituents that, on hindsight, could be deemed “political folly.” I’ve seen things played out in Barbadian politics that can be similarly described. As we say in Bajan parlance, ‘I don’t put nutten pass a politician.’

    @ NO

    Yes, I agree that, in some cases, people vote for the candidate and not the political party.

    Don Blackman is one example. He contested the 1981 general elections as the BLP’s candidate for St. Michael East and ‘won the seat’ with 2,345 votes (55.85% of ), to the DLP’s Ramases Caddle 1,854.

    Blackman subsequently crossed the floor to join the DLP……. and ran for DEM as their candidate in the 1986 general elections. He won with 3,964 votes (74.97%), while the BLP’s John Lynch received 1,153.

    Hammie Lah is another example. He was a known supporter of the BLP’s Delisle Bradshaw. However, he was invited by the DLP to contest the 1994 general elections as their candidate for St. Michael South East. He won, having gained 1,918 to Bradshaw’s 1,845.

    There was a very interesting development in St. Michael South East. While Lah complained about the way he was treated by the DEMS and crossed the floor to join the BLP, Delisle Bradshaw joined the DLP. Lah ran as the BEES’ candidate in the 1999 general elections and ‘won the ‘seat’ with 3,542…… compared with the once popular Bradshaw’s 908.

    The people of St. Michael South East said they would vote for Lah irrespective of which political party he was a member, as is evidenced by the votes.

    But how about Clyde Mascoll? He was a member of the DLP and their candidate for St. Michael North West. Mascoll took the DEMS into the 2003 general elections as Opposition Leader and ‘won the seat’ with 2,450 votes to Mark Williams’ 1,770.

    We all know about the ‘back biting’ that occurred within the DLP, which caused Mascoll to resign from that party to sit as an independent, before subsequently crossing the floor to join the BLP. Unfortunately, the constituents did not show him any sympathy and he ‘lost his seat’ to Sinckler in the 2008 general elections.

    Then, there are politicians from both BLP and DLP who would continually ‘win their seats,’ even despite a ‘swing’ away from their party.

    Like

  • @Artax

    You have given obvious examples of areas where improvements can be made to make the system more ‘equitable’ by some. We have had voluminous writings by academics on the matter of constitutional reform and law reform.

    Just read Cynthia Giles-Barrow as one example.

    Click to access Cynthia%20Barrow.pdf

    Here we have Vincent if the view because the blogmaster has posted on the topic multiple times there is no need to repost. Then we have Dee Word who is always delighted to immerse himself in the minutiae of the debate where is level of pendantry knows no bounds.

    Like

  • how about youtubing George Lamming to see and hear what he thinks could improve the system

    Like

  • i wonder what the cry will be when Pat Cheltenham is installed as the CJ, when soon to come ax laws are changed to ease the taxes on the private sector, and when a whole set of concocted reasons are made to remove the GG?

    Like

  • @Greene

    What is your source?

    Liked by 1 person

  • The only way to clean up this stupidity is by recall. That automatically puts the decision to keep or get rid of the MP back in the hands of the constituents. It’s amazing how we like to indulge in all of this talk about democracy without even suggesting that these types of decisions should be made by the very people that put you there in the first place.
    I vote for you ; you changing your mind , at least give me the opportunity to express whether I want to agree or disagree.
    Another insulting position by some , especially the Blogmaster, is that the people are unable to process stupidity within the system. At least they know when to vote them out or in.

    Like

  • educated guesses. and i meant to say if and not when

    Like

  • @William

    Of course the people understand, vote out B for D and then D for B.

    Steuspe

    Liked by 1 person

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    @Mr Blogmaster, I reluctantly respond to you….I do so because I find it incomprehensible that the editor of a blog basically founded and dedicated to discussing and ventilating the minutiae of our society with deep dives of HoA debates, legislative affairs, projects like Cahill, the judiciary etc has the gall to criticize a blogger as he “immerse{s} himself in the minutiae of the debate where is level of pendantry knows no bounds“.

    That is mind bendingly incomprehensible…. YOU put UP the topic guy…with quite a bit of minutiae seasoned data… NOT ME!

    So I do get piqued when a person tells me – so to speak – that I should not eat ice cream on the park bench because it’s dripping and in his hand he is holding the biggest, ‘most drippiest’ rum n raisin ice cream filled cone and is sitting right there on the said same park bench. Steeupse!

    Bro, this world is currently dripping in too much disinformation and falsehoods so if you don’t want to debate topics practically because you have done so endlessly over the last several years then for the love of common-sense STOP highlighting said topics… of course, yes I also have the option NOT to engage.

    It is ABSURD and TOTALLY RIDICULOUS to demean commentary on a freaking heavy-lift, MINUTIAE intensive discussion blog as pedantic… unless of course you are being just as hypocritical as the folks whom this blog aims to expose!

    I am reminded often of the difficulties of love with you and the BU blog : when you fall in love with something (someone) you have to look past the most WTF “nonsense” and simply enjoy the other things you love about it (them).

    I gone, do!

    Like

  • The post was posted regionally, let us see what the net hauls in.

    Like

  • William Skinner August 23, 2020 9:24 AM #: “The only way to clean up this stupidity is by recall. That automatically puts the decision to keep or get rid of the MP back in the hands of the constituents.”

    “I vote for you ; you changing your mind , at least give me the opportunity to express whether I want to agree or disagree.”

    @ Mr. Skinner

    That’s exactly what I was trying to ‘say.’

    Supposed Andy Capp presented himself as ABC’s candidate for St. Thomas. The constituents accepted him because they were impressed with his party’s policies….and the programs he articulated for the constituency and how he planned to implement them. Capp won the seat….. and his party, the government.

    Then subsequently, for reasons known only to himself and NOT his constituents, Capp decides to cross the floor and becomes a member of the opposition EFG. How can he fulfill the promises he made to his constituents, as a member of the opposition?

    I liken the situation similarly to that of a simple ‘verbal contract.’ Capp offers to represent St. Thomas under his party’s banner. Constituents accepted him, which is reflected in the fact he ‘won the seat.’

    I believe constituents are within their rights to have reasonable expectations Capp would fulfill his obligations for the constituency……. and to continue representing them as a member of ABC. So, by crossing the floor, Capp essentially ‘breached the contract’ by failing to perform his obligations as promised.

    As such, there should be a by-election or some other ‘recall’ system, so constituents could choose whether or not they want Capp to continue representing them as a member of EFG or another ABC candidate.

    If a democracy is a form of government in which the PEOPLE have the authority to choose their governing legislation, then a politician crossing the floor should “automatically put the decision to keep or get rid of the MP back in the hands of the constituents (people).”

    Like

  • RALPH THORNE ANOTHER BLP POLITICAL CROOK MADE MONEY ON GUYANA ELECTION ATTEMPTED RIGGING.

    Nandlall says state paid for private citizen’s challenge to no-confidence vote

    -to request audit of spending on legal services by former AG Williams

    https://www.stabroeknews.com/2020/08/23/news/guyana/nandlall-says-state-paid-for-private-citizens-challenge-to-no-confidence-vote/

    Like

  • @Greene August 23, 2020 9:16 AM “i wonder what the cry will be when Pat Cheltenham is installed as the CJ,”

    Isn’t he too old? He int 2 mornings.

    Like

  • Piece the Prophet

    @ DpD

    You said and de ole man quotes

    “…That is mind bendingly incomprehensible

    YOU put UP the topic guy…with quite a bit of minutiae seasoned data… NOT ME!”

    So now you will understand when de ole man and others here warn you the “the Honourable Blogmaster” IS NOT ONE PERSONAGE but many whose overall purpose is to sound out anti Mugabe Mottley sentiment and tag you and your computers.

    Heheheheheheheheh

    Liked by 2 people

  • Where do we stand on the brutal assault on Jacob Blake? Warrior policing is one of the US biggest exports. The new KKK wears police uniforms, not white sheets.

    Liked by 1 person

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    😥 when u think it’s so hard to cry another tear u again hear: pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, pop and another Black man dies at the hands of the authorities.

    Dear God, how many more of us must die like Jacob Blake!

    Was he reaching for a weapon (would be madness); why didn’t he heed the warning to stop; why did he endanger the lives of his children …. why seven shots in his back rather than one in his arm or use of a taser; or an aggressive physical take-down???

    Why, why, why!

    But then again just a few days ago the life of Emmitt Till was commemorated at this the 65 year of that brutal murder… a lot has changed and yet much has remained the same.

    More riots will not change this…

    This is painful to continually experience … both the absurd actions of the victim and the insanely unprofessional, uncouth, novice-style stupidity of the officer!

    Like

  • @ Pedantic

    Are you blaming the victim? You have savages who do not see humans when they see a black man, how are we going to put them back in their pens? Warrior policing is one of the America’s biggest cultural exports. Watch all those TV and Hollywood films.

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    No of course I’m not BLAMING the victim… that was a brutal, callous act of policing.

    But I would personally not act as Jacob Blake did with a PO pointing a weapon at me nor would I advise any of my male relatives or children to act as he did.

    That said this cop was totally acting as ur ‘warrior police”.

    This was very painful for me. Were I a violent type man I would act out to POs based on that shooting scene… it was horrendous.

    Like

  • Let’s hear the explanation for this one. Three policemen one black man. They couldn’t take him down. He needed SEVEN shots in the back. Just as people put holes in their own walls in frustration, an illogical reaction, people will sometimes riot in frustration.

    I really don’t think they know what else to do. This is 2020 in a supposedly civilized country. These people are being recorded and yet they persist. And nobody really believes they will be punished!

    My feeling on Mr. Blake’s actions is that since he was actually breaking up the fight he thought, “These people can’t be serious! I’m the good guy here!” And he just wasn’t thinking that he was a black man in America.

    I think black Americans are at the end of their tether. The authorities better recognise and fix this. It cannot continue. The tipping point has arrived.

    Like

  • Donna…things are degrading further and further…

    meantime…wannabes are always a laughing stock…only good for a laugh.

    https://www.theroot.com/candace-owens-snubbed-by-rnc-because-she-has-a-crush-on-1844832305

    Many of you have heard by now that the shuck and jive trap-queen, the patron saint of evangelical edgelessness, Tomi Lahren the tragic negro remix, the new iPhone version of Stacey Dash, conservative’s favorite Black friend, Candace Owens was not invited to speak at the Republican National Convention

    Like

  • Treat meetings as serious battles
    THE ABILITY OF the Senate of Barbados, as currently composed, to boldly and frequently overturn key pieces of legislation from the House of Assembly, and the implications of this reality, require some political reflection.
    For purposes of clarity, it should be recalled that roughly six months after the Government was elected by a 30-0 majority, the Senate as able to obstruct what would have been a routine bill, which sought the abolition of the mandatory death sentence in cases of murder convictions. More recently, and with more “political excitement”, was the Senate’s blocking of the Integrity In Public Life Bill, an important piece of legislation which would have fulfilled a long held political objective of ensuring greater accountability of public officials.
    Given the fact that Caribbean senates in bicameral legislatures are so structured with builtin governmental majorities so as not to inordinately frustrate the wishes of the lower house, then the recent “flexing” of the Barbados Senate is clearly abnormal. Had the rejection of the bills arisen out of the normal “good faith” attempts at clarifying errors of language and interpretation, then the adjective “obstructionist” would be inappropriate. However, what has been observed is that the built-in safe majority normally afforded to winning governments, has been denied the Barbados Labour Party (BLP). The question, then, is why?
    After the BLP’s 2018 30-0 majority, there were no Opposition senators since there was no official Opposition. It is perhaps this reality which, justifiably, might have prompted the Governor General to use her power of appointment to select people with Democratic Labour Party (DLP) associations as “Independent” Senators: Monique Taitt (daughter of deceased DLP stalwart Branford Taitt), Kevin Boyce (son of former DLP MP John Boyce), and Althea Wiggins (former DLP Deputy High Commissioner to London). Interestingly too, these personalities did not fit the profile of the standard Independent senator appointed as representatives of specific civic constituencies, such as the church, youth groups and trade unions, as seen in Toni Moore and Reverend John Rogers, for example.
    It should be noted too, that these appointments were made before the decision by BLP MP Bishop Joseph Atherley to assume the role of Opposition Leader, and to appoint the two Opposition senators: Crystal Drakes and Caswell Franklyn.
    Whilst the ruling BLP enjoys a mathematical majority, the Government senators have often been caught off guard.
    One solution is for the BLP senators to accept the current situation, miss no sitting, and treat every meeting as a serious legislative battle.
    Tennyson Joseph is a political scientist at the University of the West Indies, Cave Hill Campus, specialising in regional affairs. Email tjoe2008@live.com

    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