Another Heather Cole Column – Another Perspective Toni Moore

Heather Cole

Unfolding in Barbados, is the by-election in St George North with Ms. Toni Moore as the candidate for the Barbados Labour Party. In her response at the public announcement, she stated that she is going to “help labour.” It makes absolutely no sense at all because her job description is to “help labour,” and in addition she also sits as a Senator and is a member of the Sub- Committee of the Social Partnership.

Has Ms. Moore forgotten what a labour union is? By definition, it is an organized association of workers, trades or professions, formed to protect and further their rights and interests.

In fact, if the union needed advancement or a political voice to protect them in today’s Barbados, my argument is that the General Secretary of the largest workers union in Barbados, the Barbados Workers Union should not have accepted an offer to be candidate of a political party when she has the capacity to form her own political party.

The trade union movement has been at the cross roads in Barbados for some time and perhaps forming a worker’s party is the requirement to inject new life into this entity.

We all know the old adage, if only the lion knew its strength, then it would rule the world. In 2020, why would the leader of the largest workers union in Barbados accept the candidacy to be a part of political party and not create their own? Is it that there is a lack of vision?

In my opinion, there being no real labour parties left in Barbados, the onus on her should have been to realize this and form a labour party. Sadly Ms. Moore did not see this opportunity.

What is a labour party? It is simply a political party formed to represent the interests of ordinary working people. Based on their performance, both the BLP and the DLP have long since departed the model.

There are tremendous benefits that can be derived for the ordinary workers of Barbados if a worker’s union formed its own political party. An increase in the minimum wage, redirecting the emphasis of government to the ordinary working class instead of big business, redirection of government contracts, the development of housing for the working class, the development of workers co-operatives and business development that serves as a platform for black economic enfranchisement and the list goes on.

If she wins the by-election, the conflict of interest that will arise for Ms. Moore goes far beyond which hat she wears to ultimately which voice takes precedence, that of the Prime Minister or that of the members of the Barbados Workers Union. Based on her recent acts of conceding to government demands, it is unlikely that this will change. Most likely members of the workers union will not be confident about an altered relationship which will be perceived as the union in bed with the government.

One can be of the opinion that Ms. Moore was quite shortsighted. It is hoped that she has not dropped her bone for a reflection. However, there is scope for someone to take the trade union movement to new and greater heights than it has previously achieved.


  • Earlier Skinner quoted some opinion of Dr Marshall.Is this the Dr .arshall who is known to be a Dem sympathizer who defended a lot of the policies of the last government?Dr Marshall used to be a host of a call in programme years ago and based on his views back then persons knew where his loyalties lie.Therefore what would you expect from him?Then you appear to try to compare bim with Mr Henry who is a respected regional political strategist chalk and cheese in my view.On another note John 2 i agree with you once Ms Mottley speaks whether on a political platform or in Parliament the information presented is viewed by most as an official position.Therefore to talk about waiting for an official statement is in my view nonsense.


  • I hear the roosters crowing. It is that time of the morning.


  • So… when all the mud is slung I guess we should take that as official also.


    Wait, David! The “independent” senator/BLP candidate took her seat in the Senate!

    Wow! She did not hand in her resignation? They taking lessons from Trump?

    I gi Mia my vote an’ I watchin’ she good. This is not in order! I have given her enough benefit of the doubt. This is highly irregular!


  • @Donna

    One has to assume there is some process or convention being observed.



  • They just can’t seem to get the colonial political slave system out of their own system….and Mia plans to keep it right there…or at least that’s what she’s telling herself.

    watch muh nuh..


  • Enough said

    By Sylvan Greenidge

    This Government promised transparency, integrity and fairness. After five consecutive weeks of being dismissed and absent from the Senate the Government has said nothing about whether former Minister Lucille Moe is still a Senator and will be continuing her role.

    Additionally after being selected as a candidate to contest the SGN seat made vacant from today by former Minister Clarke of the wuk for wuk and other wuk fame, Senator moore still turned up as an Independent senator yesterday. Isn’t something wrong with that picture? Is she saying that she is still Independent from government while she is depending on capturing the seat? But this is the way they behave, there is also another so called Independent Senator who is employed by the government as an envoy. Don’t forget the former Minister whom the PM discarded and who was crying asking why them but who is now a special envoy.

    I call them the reversal government. Imagine they had to wait for Senator Franklyn to tell them that the
    Minister of Education does not have the authority to transfer secondary school principals. You mean the PS did not know that? Are they trying to sabotage the Minister and make her look bad? What will they do next? Offer Caswell $40 mil to shut up and rig this country of all the good trade unionists??


  • You can call rooster or whatever you like you are talking pure shite.I know you are not the brightest bulb on here but when Ms Mottley speaks on matters most sensible bajans take it as the policy going forward.It does not matter where she is she is the Prime Minister of the country whether you and the other bellyachers like it or not.Nothing you can do about it until an election is called pea brain.


  • Not the brightest bulb but brighter than you and that even Enuff knows!


  • Still pretending they don’t know that the island is a well known old money laundering hub, just like they pretended for decades that both political parties did not practice. condone and enable corruption, with the capture of Donville everyone went quiet and instead pretended that it didn’t happen.

    we await many of them, starting in the parliament get reeled in, for money laundering, then they will have something new to pretend about… they are pretending they are not thisclose to being blacklisted AGAIN by EU.

    land of pretenders.


  • Donna

    Is the mud concerning the programs or policies of Barbados?

    When the mud is flung it is flung by the PM of Barbados


  • Check and balance of Senate
    By Ezra Alleyne

    What goes around comes around. In earlier times, some local, vocal critics branded the Senate, our upper legislative chamber, as a dumping ground for rejected candidates. I disagreed, and said so . . . but my critics misquoted Mighty Gabby’s calypso and said: “I was trained in England and Westminster (was) choking me”.
    Suddenly, and with my apologies to Stanley Kubrick’s revealing movie Eyes Wide Shut, some of the very same critics have had a Damascus-like constitutional epiphany.
    Having “rejected the stone”, they now regard the Senate as something of a “chief cornerstone” in our constitutional arrangements.
    Mind you, there is always high value in following events in the Senate. The structure of our Constitution allows the Senate to check and balance to some extent, important constitutional changes, even if the ruling party has a full house or near full house in the House of Assembly.
    There is no built-in two-thirds majority for any Government in our Senate. In a Senate of 21 members, the Government appoints 12 senators. The Opposition appoints two, and the Governor General appoints seven senators – seven in his/her absolute discretion to reflect such interests as he/ she thinks should be represented in the Senate.
    So, a Government must get support from nongovernmental Senate members to pass constitutional amendments. If they can’t get it, the bills will not pass.
    Recently, the Government failed to get the twothirds majority of “ayes” necessary to pass the Integrity in Public Life Bill and the “death penalty” amendments. Public debate on the Senate erupted thereafter.
    But last week’s disclosure that Barbados Workers’ Union general secretary Senator Toni Moore was likely to be the Barbados Labour Party (BLP) candidate in the St George North by-election fanned the smoking embers into a raging fire, and questions have been raised about
    what critics call her role as an “Independent” Senator.
    That argument is nonsense on stilts. The Constitution does not authorise the appointment of anyone to be a senator based on his/her “independence” of political views. That argument is a canard . . . a fabricated statement.
    Modernists would more precisely blast it with their trumpets correctly calling it “fake news”, for that is what it is. Loose language can sink ships, and our constitutional founding fathers knew this. Hence, the precise language: Section 36(4) of the Constitution provides as follows: Seven Senators are appointed by the Governor General, acting at his discretion . . . to represent various interests in the community such as religious, economic, social or other such interests as the Governor General considers ought to be represented. No mention here of independent senators.
    Our Constitution, if it could speak, it would object loudly and might say to the misquoting critics: “Don’t put words in my mouth, I speak about “interests” not independence of political views.
    Moore’s interests
    Common sense would tell us, therefore, that Moore’s interests, which would have attracted attention, must have been her perspectives on worker’s interests in the complex political economy of this country. Argument done . . . but consider this: In 1971, Sir Theodore Brancker was appointed by the Governor General as one of his nominees for the Senate. Just before the election, Sir Theodore resigned his St Lucy seat where he had represented the DLP since its formation in 1956, and as Opposition Leader after 1956, Barrow having lost his seat in that 1956 election, regaining it only in the 1958 St John by-election Sir Theodore’s political views prior to the 1971 election did not seem to affect his suitability for the Senate appointment as a Governor General’s nominee. But then, the political leanings of nominees is not the critical issue; but rather they are chosen to reflect certain societal interests which His or Her Excellency thinks should be represented in the Senate.
    Sir Theodore’s appointment bothered me considerably in 1971, and the more so in 1974 when the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) under Barrow took constitutional amendments to the House. His appointment as a Governor General’s nominee and further more his being chosen President of the Senate then, materially altered the inbuilt check and balance of the original Constitution.
    And we may recall that the highly controversial Constitutional Amendments in 1974 easily got the two-thirds majority in the Senate.
    Let me be clear, I applaud each and everyone of the Governor General’s nominees in this current Senate. The choices reflect an intimate and proper understanding of the functional aspects of our Constitution, and of the interests which presently should be reflected in the membership of the Upper Chamber.
    The Senate of 2018-2023 is truly a fascinating study in political wisdom . . . but 1971 was a different year! A very different year.
    Ezra Alleyne is an attorney and a former Deputy Speaker of the House of Assembly.


  • When will the Barbados police arrest this thief and all her accomplices, this is not a civil matter, it’s grand theft, theft of the man’s body from QEH, fraud etc..

    “Winston Clarke
    7tSrponussoredh ·
    On the 14th of September, 2020, I had the privelege of having an audience with the Registrar of the Supreme Court. As a result of that meeting I was then informed that the Letters Testamentary that Desiree Regis-Alleyne was using were null and void and had been recalled. It baffles me how this woman who was no family to Ishmael Steele and was only what could be considered “hired help” should feel that she is entitled to all of Mr. Steele’s worldly possessions and that his close relatives should have nothing. The other neighbors would also have assisted this gentleman and we do not see them claiming his car or house. How can one woman be so greedy? She even had tenants in the house and was renting it out as if it was already hers. She is not even a registered landlord. All I want is to show the court the documented evidence and the numerous witnesses we have to all the fraud that was committed and the lies that were told. She is in for a big surprise.”


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 )

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