“On November 11, 2020, Moore received 3154 votes in the by-election. Floyd Reifer of the Democratic Labour Party was the nearest challenger with 1 327.Grenville Phillips of Solutions Barbados earned 95, David Walrond of the opposition People’s Party for Democracy and Development got 80, Ambrose Grosvenor of the United Progressive Party 70 and the Bajan Free Party’s Alex Mitchell received ten.” – Nation Newspaper 12/11/2020
The result of the St. George North by election year exposes reasons to pause for those who worry about the current state of governance in Barbados. Historically we have managed the affairs of state well enough to have earned the label ‘a stable political country’. However, the result of the 2018 general election created an unprecedented situation where for the first time the OPPOSITION in the House of Assembly was not comprised of members of a party who faced the electorate under a different party banner. Instead, Bishop Joseph Atherley saved the day by crossing the floor to be anointed the Leader of the Opposition by the Governor General.
The decision by Atherley to cross the floor averted a constitutional crisis many continue to argue (including this blogmaster) and the rest is history to cite an often used cliché. Despite his best effort to be the dissenting voice inside and outside of parliament Atherley his People’s Party for Democracy has been unable to win measurable support from Barbadians. The result of the St. George North by election validates the position. The other conclusion political pundits are certain is that the third party movement in its current form has been rejected by the electorate.
A general election is constitutionally due in 2023 and surprise surprise the main political parties to contest will be the Barbados Labour Party (BLP) and Democratic Labour Party (DLP). In other words the DLP represents the government in waiting. It means therefore the general public is vested in a fit for purpose political opposition whether it is occupying parliamant or on the outside. An irony often discussed when this matter surfaces is to highlight a political party is a private member organization, yet it must be ready to take over the job of managing the weighty affairs of state.
Whether we like it or not the DLP represents the only practical legitimate political opposition voice in the mind of the public- although it failed to win a single seat in the last general election. To compare with other countries the DLP is the entrenched other member of the duopoly like the Democrats and Republicans, Labour and Tories or JLP and PNP to name three.
The inability of the DLP so far to list a full slate of candidates to contest the 2023 general election is a concern.
The inability of party leader to elevate her national profile in an environment screeching for a political alternative is a concern.
The inability of the DLP to speak authoritatively on economic policy is a concern.
These are not exhaustive concerns and the one not mentioned and possibly the biggest is the potential collateral damage from Donville Inniss’ verdict due to be handed down next week in New York.
@ Lorenzo, @ Artax
You have your views and I have mine:
These are the facts:
1.Mascoll was removed and his party won;
2. Mottley was removed and her party lost;
3. Mascoll’s party won two consecutive elections after he left;
4. Mascoll did not win his seat after he left his party.
5. Mia Mottley was kicked to the curb by Arthur. She chose to remain and defend her party. Mascoll chose to leave his party.
Nobody can dispute these facts.
In my opinion nobody was “unfaired”. It was simple party politics.
I dun wid dat .
Skinner you make some truthful points.However point 2 about Ms Mottley is a non point.This is about Mr Thompson and Mr Mascoll.The point of the dems winning two elections one was with Mr Thompson and the other in dubious circumstances in 2013 in my view.Anyone with any fair mind would agree that Mr Thompson undermined Mr Mascoll on his return from running scared of Mr Arthur in 2003..Therrfore Mr Mascoll did the honourable thing and left the dems.
@ Lorenzo
Where you see honor in Mascoll ; I see political cowardice.
The point is that Ms. Mottley demonstrated tremendous loyalty to her party.
They both suffered a similar fate and they chose to respond differently.
The operative word here is replaced . I was just making comparisons of the two because they were both opposition leaders when their parties preferred bothers to lead.
So, let’ us agree to disagree on this one.
Enjoy your evening.
Others to lead not bothers. Apologies.
@ William Skinner May 6, 2021 2:15 PM #
RE: “You have your views and I have mine.”
Yes, I agree.
RE: “Nobody can dispute these facts.”
YES, “these facts” as you’ve described them, CAN BE DISPUTED, when placed within their ‘perspective context.’
For example, “Mascoll was removed and his party won.” This CAN BE DISPUTED because Mascoll was NOT removed.
You seem to believe you’re always correct and hate having people challenge your opinions, especially if you think they’re beneath you.
But, I won’t bother to go any further and agree “let us agree to disagree on this one.”
@ Artax
I have had several discussions right here on BU, with you , where we have had different opinions and have always ended as gentlemen. I can pull exchanges where you have complimented me on my objectivity.
For you to write this, is almost impossible for me to believe.;
“You seem to believe you’re always correct and hate having people challenge your opinions, especially if you think they’re beneath you.”
My dear man, nobody knows William Skinner will write that.
I’ve been on BU for donkey years ; I have been in several differences with people. Never once did I get personal. Maybe a bit mischievous with the pen but never abusive or disrespectful.
However, you have a good day and Stay Safe. I still think that you’re an asset to BU. Keep up the good work.
Peace.
Should read :nobody who knows William Skinner will write that.
https://fb.watch/7vBWuueLGk/