Banner promoting anonymous crime reporting with a phone and contact number 1 800 TIPS (8477), featuring the Crime Stoppers logo and a QR code for submitting tips.

← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

Submitted by Heather Cole

General Elections were held in Barbados on January 19th, 2022, and the ruling Administration the Barbados Labour Party (BLP) came away with a resounding victory capturing all 30 seats, leaving all the other opposition parties with zero. Today, 14 days after, now that the dust has settled, it is clear that despite this achievement, the government of Barbados is fighting for power.

The fight relates to the fact that Parliament cannot be seated as the Upper House or the Senate is not constituted. The winning party is like a ship without its rudder as it cannot steer or maneuver at sea. It is in limbo and at the mercy of the waves if caught in a storm. Without Parliament being fully constituted, the administration is unable to amend any law far less create new ones and start its agenda.

Based on the Constitution, two Opposition Senators are required in the make-up of the constituted Senate. Since no members of the opposing parties won any seats, it is left to the President based on the Constitution to act as the Leader of the Opposition and appoint 2 persons who opposed the BLP in the General Election.

The ruling Administration extended an offer to the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) which gained the second most votes to seat two of their Senators. The DLP refused stating that it was not a proper offer since the Prime Minister had no authority to extend the offer. Then the Attorney General walked back on the offer stating that the prime Minister was only seeking to facilitate their entry into Parliament and stating that there must be a meeting with the ruling Administration, the President and the DLP. At writing the DLP has not responded.

Is the Barbados Labour Party in Control?

Clearly the BLP wants to get on with its agenda which perhaps contains vaccine mandates, safe zones, IMF conditionalities and now the contentious issue of seating an 18-year-old in the Senate (even though they had previously opposed seating a 25 year old DLP Senator stating that he was too young). All these are now problematic due to the crisis of there not being a fully constituted Senate. In essence the government is operating in a system that they cannot control the outcome. At present it is powerless except for day-to-day administration. It makes one wonder how long the island can operate without a functioning Parliament. Perhaps there is some pressure based on a commitment to external forces that caused an offer to be extended to the DLP.

Does the Power lie in the Hands of the Democratic Labour Party?

Though it may seem a simple act of benevolence, the offer that was extended to the DLP cannot be construed as such. It was simply to use them to achieve the government’s agenda as the DLP simply will not have the numbers to halt any amendment or passing of a bill into law.

It is significant to note that accepting that offer would also set a precedent to exclude smaller parties from the House of Assembly at this time since they may not be the holder of the second highest tally of votes.

However, it is not only the DLP that has the power of choice; all the opposition parties and independent persons who took part in the General Elections have the same power of choice in deciding whether to accept an offer from the President simply because the Constitution does not recognize political parties, only people. If the opposition parties and independents signed an agreement to reject any such offer, the ship is rendered helpless, forced out to sea, or slammed into the rocks by the mighty waves. Clearly, the back of this Administration is against the wall.

Just selecting two Senators will not resolve this constitutional crisis. It is like prolonging agony not just kicking the ball down the road for someone else to correct later.

The System

The system controlled and manipulated Electoral and Boundaries Commission (EBC) based its decision to disenfranchise thousands of Barbadians and blamed it on the State of Emergency Protocols. This is unacceptable as the protocols were easily amended to suit tourists and celebrations for the Republic. It must be noted that the EBC did not disenfranchise its workers, some of whom must have been infected and spreaders of the virus because a few days later it had to close its office.

When the Attorney General lashed out at the DLP to stop playing politics, it came to light that he did not realize that the fight is not against them but against the voracious beast of a system whose actions his own party has taken to a whole new level by paying social media influencers from the public purse, by obtaining campaign funds from local and international financers as well as maintaining a Department of Communications while the Government Information Service still exists.

The system has now taken on a life of its own and as the song by Jah Cure says, “Babylon can’t feed this beast” and there is no mechanism in place to control it. The system is now working in overdrive to maintain the 2 Barbadoses’. One with the rich man in his castle and the poor man destined to remain at his gate. One in which the tourist sees a paradise and the workers go home to pull back the curtain to show the stark reality of their lives. One in which economic enfranchisement will never be given to the poor. The Poverty Alleviation Fund remains empty, yet government can hold a lavish celebration for a meaningless Republic. The system has made sure that justice is not for the poor. That poor black men are paraded like animals and incarcerated for a spliff like the inhumane conditions of slavery.

From independence, the system has made a mockery of the franchise with use of bribery through giving corn beef and biscuits to the gullible in exchange for their votes. The bribery has not stopped, the vote is now exchange for far more valuable items.

The system has also turned political campaign meetings into lavish parties with big stages and sound systems and bright lights to entice the youth to have a grand time as they listen to popular artistes. Those feel-good moments lead to a five-year sentence of hardship including lack of representation, high prices of food, constant increases in the cost of gasoline, lack of infrastructural development, lack of opportunities, no jobs and the desires for a better life come to naught.

The privileged few can escape the island for supposedly greener pastures, but the majority have no choice but to remain and face this hard brutish existence, yet they revere politicians more than themselves. The cycle of economic poverty for the lower class is perpetrated by political parties. They pay back their campaign financers with big contracts and titles, but they only provide scraps and promises to the people who elected them.

The actions of this system, expressed in the words of Bob Marley is “Babylon system is a vampire, sucking the blood of the sufferers.” The pervasive corrupt practices that start by ensuring that a party dominates the first pass the post Westminster System has been to the detriment of the social and economic life of ordinary Barbadians.

We must kill this beast. It has outlived its usefulness. But perhaps, the system is turning on itself, decaying from within, just like the Roman Empire and we can no longer choose to ignore this fact. On two consecutive occasions it has produced a winner without power. On the first occasion Mr. Joseph Atherley crossed the floor from the BLP, became the leader of the Opposition and formed his own party, the People’s Democratic Party (PDP). Mr. Atherley’s crossing the floor of the House of Assembly was not a solution, it was just respite. The administration ignored this, and the situation has presented itself again.

What decisions will the President of the Republic make?

The President’s authority rests in the Constitution. She can extend an offer to any of the candidates who took part in the General Election to oppose the government since the Constitution does not recognize political parties. However, if she does this the system remains unchallenged. The Senators will be unable to halt the amendment or passage of any legislation which they deem unsuitable or in the best interest of Barbadians.

The question one must ask is if the President can challenge the system by not siding with the BLP or the Opposition and if she can send the electorate back to the polls. The grounds for this being that the General Election held on January 19th, 2022, was neither free nor fair. The following must occur if the President has the authority and chooses to send the electorate back to the polls.

  1. A suitable time frame must be provided that allows the Electoral and Boundaries Commission (EBC) to get its act together to ensure that persons are not disenfranchised.
  2. Provisions be made for persons in isolation and quarantine to vote.
  3. Options be provided for voting such as by mail or online or other means to facilitate those who do not wish to attend a polling station during the pandemic.

In addition, a Referendum be held at the time of the General Elections to implement the Proportional Representation System in the House of Assembly as the best solution to the current constitutional crisis. One may ask, why such a system? The answer is that it will truly allow representation for all the votes cast by the people of Barbados, it allows for inclusion of all political parties and Independents in the Parliament if they meet a certain threshold of votes (1%).

Senators must also be elected. It should not be a privilege to sit in the Senate, it must be a right by achievement.

We also need a monitoring system enacted into law that prevents wealthy campaign financers from determining what happens and what will never happen in Barbados.


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

824 responses to “Who Will Win The Fight For Power?”


  1. @Donna February 5, 2022 1:06 PM “Who hates Bajans abroad? Who, who, WHO? These Bajans abroad are our mothers, fathers, daughters, sons, aunts, uncles, grandmothers, grandfathers, grand-daughters, grandsons, cousins [neices and nephews, great nieces and nephews] and friends…My blood boiled at the injustice meted out to Windrushers. There is always excitement in the households across Barbados when, ” We got relatives coming in from overseas!” – happy times!”

    Donna, I second this TRUE statement. I feel sad because I had only 3 “overseas Bajans” visitors last year, and only one of us went overseas. We would normally happily welcome up to 10 or 12 visitors, family, friends, friends of our family. Always glad to see them. I especially miss what I call my “wuk-up crew” those born abroad Bajans who come to enjoy the festive times, and who give always give me the opportunity to cook massive quantities of food and who come and go as they please at all hours of the day and night. Like Donna I am a citizen of multiple countries. I live here. I can choose to live in more than one elsewhere. Barbados is not Utopia. Never has been. Never will be. I chose to live here. I respect the choices of my siblings, children, father, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews etc, who have chosen to live elsewhere for a year or two or for a lifetime.

    Don’t know why some here feel hated, unloved, disrespected, envied.


  2. @Sargeant February 5, 2022 2:07 PM

    Smart musings of a snow bound Bajan in the frozen North

    “How do you rebuild a Party? Choose two young potential leaders, let them get exposure to the cut and thrust of political debate; the Gov’t will provide many opportunities for them to offer criticism; if one Senator (C Franklyn) could cause the leadership of the BLP sleepless nights think of what two could do; if they are effective the Press will be camping on their doorstep to obtain their positions on various issues. They could get the Party more exposure than the speeches at the tedious luncheons that are a staple of the Party.”


  3. ac@2:10 pm “Just stick to planting seeds or whatever”

    Thanks for the reminder. I planted 2 kinds of parsley today.

    But as they say I can walk and chew gum. So you want to talk some more politics with me?


  4. Sometimes, I don’t feel the love.


  5. @JohnFebruary 5, 2022 7:07 PM

    The Wikipedia article about the fat Pastor Hewitt is a joke.

    Did he write it himself? How can a guy be in a party that doesn’t even disassociate itself from money laundering and corruption? Or does the pastor approve of this abnormal behaviour?

    Where is “Elon Musk”?


  6. @Tron February 5, 2022 2:25 PM “I doubt very much that the impoverished riffraff called DLP supporters can afford to spend more than $3 per month.”

    Stupssseee!!! A fishcake cost 75 cents. 4 fishcakes cost $3. I have heard of bread and fish lawyers. Are you telling me that there are also bread and fish political parties?

    Impoverished or not, riff raff or not. $3 per month is a big, big joke.

    And speaking of impoverished just recently I learned that Bajans spent $100 million a year on lottery tickets.

    $100 million x the next 5 years? Half a billion Barbados is more than enough to run a nice election campaign.

    And a bit left over for a west coast villa with Miele taps.

    We Bajans have a saying “good t’ing no cheap, cheap t’ing no good.”


  7. Loopnews – Barbados
    For 2021, The Barbados Lottery has paid over $31 million to the many lucky Double Draw winners. Starting from $1 per ticket with 4 draws per day, you can win up to $25,000 with the Double Draw game

    Cuhdear… please explain the remaining $69M


  8. @Donna February 5, 2022 2:56 PM “Oh dear! “Stick to planting seeds” . This is not the first time I have heard that being used as a put down on BU.”

    Always by idiots Donna. Always by idiots.

    The pandemic has been hard. Sadly some people here and elsewhere did not have enough to eat. Sadly some had to depend on food banks, Sadly some had to depend on government food baskets. The Barbados government handed out food baskets to 83,000 thousand households but they did not stop at my home, Little Johnnie’s home, nor the homes of my siblings even though we live in 3 different constituencies.

    Wonder why?

    We are perceived as always having enough.

    Today I was gifted 4 plantains and 10 bananas. Last week a paw-paw. In my pantry dried cassava which I grew and processed myself, and 3 kinds of preserved peppers which I also grew myself. In my freezer okras, cherry tomatoes, spinach, bok-choi, cassava and sweet potatoes. In the refrigerator flavour peppers. At my back door, spinach, chives, sweet basil, rosemary, garlic. The thing is when you grow food you associate with other food growers and they give you stuff.

    I would much rather be a subsistence farmer that be a political yard fowl. Hallelujah. I don’t have to be a political yard fowl.

    Had a lovely omelette this morning prepared with a genuine yard fowl egg with my own chives, spinach and cherry tomatoes. I am an excellent cook too as food growers tend to be. Jeff Bezos is richer than I am by far but I know that he did not eat better than me today.

    So the resident BU yard fowl can go to hell.


  9. 🙂
    Genuine yardfowl
    BU yardfowl
    Political yardfowl
    Any more breeds?


  10. Cuhdear BajanFebruary 5, 2022 7:49 PM

    ac@2:10 pm “Just stick to planting seeds or whatever”

    Thanks for the reminder. I planted 2 kinds of parsley today.

    But as they say I can walk and chew gum. So you want to talk some more politics with me?
    Xxxcccc
    😆🤣😂😹
    Wuhloss much belly
    Never knew that seeds could provoke some uh wanna that much
    Wanna must got a miserable life
    😆🤣


  11. John February 5, 2022 4:08 PM “At those public meetings I would invite the various lawyers who have proffered their opinions in the press to come and explain to the ignorant masses.”

    How do you plan to get “the ignorant masses” to attend these meetings? I don’t know if you haven’t notices but the “ignorant masses” have twice told the DLP

    BE OFF.

    P.S. You plan to pay for the meetings? How does a party get enough money to hold meetings when the membership fee is $3 per month?

    But I int no Barbados scholar so nobody don’t have to listen to me.


  12. @TheOGazerts February 5, 2022 8:19 PM “For 2021, The Barbados Lottery has paid over $31 million to the many lucky Double Draw winners. Starting from $1 per ticket with 4 draws per day, you can win up to $25,000 with the Double Draw game. Cuhdear… please explain the remaining $69M.

    It has been a long time since last I worked in the village shop with mummy, auntie and granddad. But as I recall the shopkeeper has to hold back something for restocking. The shopkeeper has to pay the staff, the utilities, has to buy oats for the horse, or gas for the truck or van. May even have to support the children of his multiple relationships, has to hold back something to support the legal family, may have to pay the divorce lawyer. I expect the people who own the lottery operate on the same “principles” and that the extra $69 million goes for such things


  13. Cuhdear BajanFebruary 5, 2022 8:48 PM

    John February 5, 2022 4:08 PM “At those public meetings I would invite the various lawyers who have proffered their opinions in the press to come and explain to the ignorant masses.”

    How do you plan to get “the ignorant masses” to attend these meetings? I don’t know if you haven’t notices but the “ignorant masses” have twice told the DLP

    BE OFF.

    P.S. You plan to pay for the meetings? How does a party get enough money to hold meetings when the membership fee is $3 per month?

    But I int no Barbados scholar so nobody don’t have to listen to me.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    You dont’ say!!

    Until the appearance of Froon, the DLP were not doing too bad with attendance.

    All the riff raff and ignorant masses (the missing 70% of the electorate??) attended in their cars!!

    … even if they did not pay their $3.00 membership fees.

    https://imgur.com/JDyr7nO


  14. As you say, you int no Barbados scholar but if you were you would notice something is missing in your logic and spend some time trying to explain it.


  15. I am sure the 70% would be fertile ground for a seed to be cast, maybe even some of the 30% might receive it well too.

    Bajans like to learn new things, especially when it exposes the bigups!!.


  16. “Any more breeds?”

    Hmmm…….

    Strange you should ask.

    I’m surprised “limited range yard-fowl” wasn’t included on your list.

    I remember you describing me as such.

    But, based on your comments since the second 30-0, I was thinking……… nah, forget it.


  17. Dems differ on seat offer

    By Colville Mounsey
    colvillemounsey@nationnews.com

    “Put pride aside and take the Prime Minister’s offer of the two Senate seats.”
    This admonition to the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) comes from one of its former member of Parliament and advisors, Hamilton Lashley, who said the party need not complicate the issue with the legal nuances but should instead concentrate on the preservation of democracy.
    This was in stark contrast to the advice of DLP stalwart Robert “Bobby” Morris, who posited the view that the party should accept the Senate seats only if the proposed Constitutional amendments pass muster of their legal experts.
    Meanwhile, former Attorney General under the Freundel Stuart administration, Adriel Brathwaite, contended there were still many legal question marks hovering over the development, including whether the current Parliament was properly constituted, thereby allowing it to make the proposed amendments.
    On Friday, immediately after the first sitting of Parliament since the Barbados Labour Party (BLP) won all 30 seats at the January 19 poll, Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley said her administration had brought the proposed amendment to allow for the party with the second-most votes in the General Election to select the two senators, a right currently reserved solely for the Opposition Leader. Should the DLP refuse to take up the provision, then the offer will go to the Bishop Joseph Atherley-led Alliance Party for Progress (APP), as it amassed the third-highest number of votes in the election.
    Mottley implored the DLP to accept the provision, as a refusal to do so had wider implications for the country’s democracy beyond representation in the House of Assembly.
    The Prime Minister said the Opposition had a responsibility to choose five people to serve on the Electoral & Boundaries Commission (EBC), noting it was not in the interest of democracy to have all power consolidated in the hands of one person.
    Concurring with Mottley, Lashley, who has straddled both sides of the political divide during his political career that dates back to 1994, said the DLP ought to put aside partisan politics and look at the greater good of the country.
    “Take the seats. That’s my advice in three simple words. It is a very good offer by the Prime Minister. In my view, it is an olive branch and I believe that they should take it. If they have any interest in preserving parliamentary democracy, then they should take it,” said Lashley.
    He argued that Mottley should be commended for her benevolence, noting that he could think of no other political leader across the region who would make such a gesture to a political opponent.
    “I would not be overly concerned about the various interpretations of the law at this time, not when you are talking about democracy. I do understand the experts talking about who has the right to this and that; I am not interested in that. I am interested in the fact that Barbadians have been accustomed to an Opposition.
    No voice
    “The DLP, having suffered two 30-0 defeats in three years, have no voice in the hallowed halls of Parliament and it is fitting that those DLP supporters know that their voice is represented in the Senate. It is definitely a good move by her, one which she didn’t have to do, and it is up to the Democratic Labour Party to put aside some of their pride,” he said.
    On the other hand, Morris, who made it clear he was merely sharing his own views and not speaking for the party, said the amendments made no allowance for an Opposition Leader, and this was an area that ought to be settled before the DLP committed to the appointment of senators.
    The proposed amendment
    to Section 75 of the Constitution states: “The reference to the Leader of the Opposition shall be read as a reference to the opposing political party which obtained the highest number of votes in the General Election following the dissolution of Parliament.”
    “If after the experts have agreed that the changes are all legal and everything is above board, which would mean that the Parliament was well constituted at the time of the amendment, if I were advising the DLP, I would respond in such a way that I would take that offer on condition that the issue of the Leader of the Opposition is settled first.
    “I would look at the offer positively, but the major issue would be the Leader of the Opposition,” Morris said.
    However, Brathwaite said that, in his professional opinion, Parliament was not legally constituted and therefore any attempt to tinker with the Constitution would be invalid. The former AG promised to share more details of his legal perspective at a later date.
    “I believe that the Constitution is quite clear that the power resides with the President to appoint two Opposition Senators at her discretion. I do not believe that the power resides with the Prime Minister to offer seats to anyone, according to my reading of the Constitution,” he said.
    “There is no need to make the constitutional change, to begin with, and in order to do so they have to have a Parliament that is properly constituted. Right now, we do not have a properly constituted Parliament as far as I am concerned.”

    Source: Nation


  18. Leave out the ‘popularity contest’

    Hewitt: Not the way to choose new DLP leader
    By Rachelle Agard rachelleagard@nationnews.com

    Reverend Guy Hewitt is suggesting that the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) needs to look beyond what he termed the popularity contest and see who best demonstrates the correct skillset to take the party forward.
    “At this time, it is imperative that the DLP tries to avoid as best as it can any battle royal, any [contest] for leadership, which I believe we can do, if we undertake a more thorough and dynamic recruitment process,” he said in an interview with the Sunday Sun.
    His comments come in the wake of former party president Verla De Peiza resigning from the post following the party’s second 30-0 defeat at the polls in three and a half years. Since then, first vice president Steve Blackett has been filling in as interim president.
    Hewitt, who lost the party’s last election for presidency after challenging De Peiza last August, said some of the qualities the new leader would need included vision and decision making, relationship and team building, communications, results orientation, delegation and more importantly conflict management.
    Election of addition
    “I am not saying at the end of the day you might not have an election, but it is how you go about electing that person. It should really be an election of addition and not subtraction.
    “Anybody who is coming to step forward to be the future leader of the DLP should not be approaching this as a [contest] between different factions or ambitions, but really trying to bring people together, trying to bring together views and ideas, synchronising different positions and perspectives that ultimately lead to cooperation and reconstruction in the party, thereby enhancing the organisation and repositioning it in the eyes of the members and Barbados regardless of whoever wins,” he said, adding that the party needed to be united around a single leader.
    In another section of the media, former DLP minister Hamilton Lashley urged Hewitt to step forward to contest the leadership position which comes up in April.
    Still committed
    “That is not something I have either dismissed or affirmed, but what I would really like to be a part of is a way of rebuilding the party as an organisation and as a collective.
    “I have remained committed to the DLP in whatever role I am in and I will happily be a part of any team or deliberation process that seeks to discern how best the organisation can go forward . . . . If I am or am not in a leadership role, the party will always be able to count on my support,” he said.
    While Hewitt said he was dismayed at not being able to be in Barbados for Christmas or for the last month’s General Election, he said he was delayed due to an immigration impediment.
    “As soon as I am able to do that, my first port of call will be Barbados because it is the land I love and the place that I am most committed to.
    “I hope to be able to be there soon, but regardless
    of wherever I am, my heart will always be in Barbados and I will always give the Democratic Labour Party my best,” he pledged.
    Serious disconnect
    Hewitt said the 30-0 defeat last month, as happened in the 2018 General Election, reflected a serious disconnect between the party and the electorate.
    “I think it belies the reality that lightning can and, even in politics, does strike in the same place more than once. “But the problem is that we cannot afford in the DLP a third strike. That may be fatal for the party and for our democracy . . . . We have to find a new way forward in the DLP and it is a monumental task,” he said.
    However, Hewitt was not in agreement that the “old guard” of the DLP should “bow out”, but noted there needed to be a balance for continuity. He said while most of the candidates for the last General Election were “fresh faced”, there were some who brought a lot to the campaign.
    “It’s a question of what is the balance and what is the space being created for future leaders. If we look at the last General Election, the vast majority of the candidates representing the DLP were first-timers, and so we have to be able to appreciate that the slate of candidates was young and new, some might say a little too green.
    “It is about recognising the importance of bringing together and synchronising that diversity of experience, bringing in fresh blood, but being able to do it in a way that works for the party, but also responds to what the country is looking for,” he said.
    ‘Anybody who is coming to step forward to be the future leader of the DLP should not be approaching this as a [contest] between different factions or ambitions, but really trying to bring people together
    . . .’

    Source: Nation


  19. Diaspora’s remedy for DLP success
    By Tony Best Unable to win a single seat in successive elections, the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) should reorganise itself, get back to its basic philosophical anchors and concentrate on attracting tech savvy youth to its ranks.
    Just as important, it should put considerable energy into finding a charismatic leader who would appeal to young people and give Prime Minister Mia Mottley some stiff competition at home and in the diaspora.
    That’s according to some Bajans in North America, some of whom were in leadership positions in the DLP branch in the United States or grew up in longstanding DLPoriented families in Barbados.
    In conversations with the Sunday Sun, DLP supporters lamented the two 30-0 defeats at Mottley’s hands and insisted they had fully expected the party to lose last month’s election.
    “We have to work hard to reshape our party’s image and let people know who we are and what we stand for,” said Trevor Massiah, who until recently led the Friends of Barbados DLP Association, the party’s branch in Brooklyn.
    ‘Start from scratch’
    “We must put on our sneakers, get across our country, go into neighbourhoods and start from scratch. The party needs a significant make-over, because when something goes as wrong as losing two general elections in a row by 30-0, it is time to return to the drawing board and start fresh.”
    He put much of the blame for the stinging loss at the polls on strategic campaign mistakes, such as inviting Freundel Stuart, the former Prime Minister to speak on its platforms.
    “Look, why would the party do that when he had failed to communicate effectively with people when he headed the Government?” asked Massiah, a businessman. “He didn’t have anything to say back then and why would they believe he would have had something to tell Barbadians after three and a half years of silence following the horrifying defeat. That’s what I would like to find out.”
    Massiah said Verla De Peiza, the DLP leader in the last election was hampered by the calling of a snap election and by the party’s inability to get out its supporters on polling day.
    “When you are caught unprepared, can’t get your people to the polls and are going up against Mia Mottley, a formidable political opponent, you are not in a position to win,” he argued.
    Interestingly, Massiah believes De Peiza did a good job in rebuilding the party after the 2018 defeat, contending she shouldn’t have stepped down from the leadership so quickly after the recent loss.
    “She brought the party back from the ground and did a good job leading it into the recent election. I am sorry she quit so quickly,” he said.
    Like most Bajans interviewed, Shirley Lashley, a Brooklyn barber who once sat on the DLP’s general council, said the party was in urgent need of a top-tobottom reorganisation and as part of it, De Peiza should accept any offer of a Senate seat extended to her by Mottley. That’s because it would give the party a voice in the running of the nation’s affairs.
    “The country would be better off. Mia wouldn’t be doing this for Mia’s sake, she would be doing it for the country,” insisted Lashley. “It would make the country stronger.”
    Dr Andy Knight, a top international affairs expert in Canada and senior professor of political science at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, urged the DLP to engage in “deep soul searching” to find its roots.
    “When you lose two elections in a row it means you have to do some serious soul searching and try to figure out exactly what’s the problem,” Knight said from the prestigious Yale University campus in Connecticut where he is spending a year as a Fulbright scholar.
    “You have to go back to the days of Errol Barrow and get reacquainted with your raison d’etre, the reason for being, and try to figure out if you are still the same party. My sense is that the DLP has changed a lot in the last three decades to the point at which it is hardly recognisable as a major force in the country.
    ‘Return to drawing board’
    “In essence, return to the drawing board, see what was the DLP’s initial philosophy, in much the same way that the BLP acted when it lost a few elections in the past. In a way the BLP went back to its roots and the DLP would do well to go back to its roots. It should realise that a lot has changed and therefore must update its reason for being there. They just can’t rely on the idea that they are the party of Errol Barrow any more. There has to be new leadership. There has to be new voices,
    new ideas that represent the will of the people.” Much of that sentiment was shared by Cheryl Thompson, a successful entrepreneur in Texas, who said she grew up in Barbados in a traditional DLP household but has since switched her political support to Mottley, whom she described as a dynamic and charismatic leader who has done a lot to boost Barbados’ image and involvement around the world.
    “I came from a DLP family all the way, my father, mother, they never voted any other way than for the DLP and when I voted, I supported the DLP a long time ago before I migrated to the US,” she said.
    “But over the years, after watching (from Texas) I changed. I was really a strong DLP person. Right now I can say outright that I am a BLP supporter.”
    Thompson, who owns and runs a construction company in Texas, praised Mottley for her dynamism and leadership and communication skills.
    Dr Louis Browne, a retired university communications professor in Texas, said that the DLP suffered in the last election because its manifesto didn’t provide a clear and convincing message that the party was united and in step with the times.
    “The message wasn’t clear. I didn’t get a feeling that the party was prepared for the election,” added Browne. “It was hard to get a feel for the party’s message. It must rebuild from ground zero and it must appeal to the young, techsavvy Bajans.” Derrice Dean, a Caribbean broadcaster in Washington, D.C. who is a former World Bank professional, blamed inadequate communication between the DLP and the Barbadian public for much of the party’s election woes.
    “The party must become more tech-savvy in order to reach young people on social media and satisfy the needs of the youth,” she said.
    “Mottley, on the other hand, knows the communications technology and uses it to reach out to the youth and others. Mottley isn’t a fumbling user and can match other people’s knowledge of it. The DLP must reorganise itself, get with the technology, be able to think outside of the box and find a new leader who can match wits and high tech savvy with Mottley.”
    He put much of the blame for the stinging loss at the polls on strategic campaign mistakes, such as inviting Freundel Stuart, the former Prime Minister to speak on its platforms.

    Source: Nation


  20. Address us on pressing issues

    At the recent swearing in ceremony of the Cabinet members, Prime Minister Mottley gave us a peek into some of the Government’s goals for its new term.
    She spoke on matters such as climate change, the declining population of Barbados and healthcare. While these are all important matters, I am still waiting to hear the Government’s intentions for the more pressing issues currently affecting the country.
    The business and medical community eagerly await the Government’s position on the proposed implementation of the safe zones.
    Since the withdrawal of the safe zones directives for the health care sector, we have received no indication from Government on whether it plans to continue with the initiative or when the new directives may be implemented.
    The private sector continues to push for the Government to introduce legislation creating mandatory vaccination and/ or testing requirements for employees in other sectors such as tourism, education and those considered frontline workers. Yet the Government remains silent.
    However, I continue to be surprised at the insistence by some employers that employees be vaccinated when all the recent data shows that the current vaccines provide very little to no protection against infection and transmission of the Omicron variant (see reports from the UK Health Security Agency between December 2021 and 31 January 2022).
    Many workplaces are currently experiencing increasing numbers of vaccinated employees testing positive which results in staff shortages.
    These employees, like everyone else, must isolate once they test positive or have been in contact with a positive case. In fact, the Ministry of Health Dashboards for the periods January 31 and February 3, 2022 again show more vaccinated persons in isolation than unvaccinated.
    The occasional testing of employees may help to limit the presence and transmission of the virus within the workplace, but only if all employees are occasionally tested regardless of their vaccination status.
    Applying testing mandates to only unvaccinated staff is unsupported by the science and the data and cannot be justified in law.
    And what about the nurses whose strike action continues? Does the Government intend under its newly appointed Minister of Health to finally convene a meeting with the nurses and their union? Or will this administration continue to stonewall those nurses who form part of the Unity Workers
    Union and wait till they bring the health sector to its knees? One of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Barbados Constitution is that of freedom of Association. Workers should feel free to join whichever union they choose without fearing that their needs are more likely to be ignored unless they are members of the unions that joined with this administration to condemn the nurses’ strike.
    Some continue to insist that the nurses by virtue of their chosen vocations, should essentially act as martyrs and put the needs of their patients above their own needs to be consistently paid, have proper working conditions and protective gear. But none of these nurses signed up to work for free, or they would have simply joined a volunteer organisation. Instead, like all other employees, they sought gainful employment to provide their services in exchange for payment and a safe working environment.
    Many in the entertainment sector are calling for an end to the curfew and on the number of persons allowed at events. Minister Kerrie Symmonds and David Ellis have both hinted at an ease in the restrictions and a further opening up of the economy.
    It is only fair that the Government address the legitimate questions of those in the eSntertainment sector whose ability to earn has been seriously hampered by the pandemic.
    Given what we witnessed recently at cricket and the elections, I can see no valid reason for the continued restrictions in the entertainment sector.
    We eagerly await word on these pressing matters.
    Michelle M. Russell is an attorney at law with a passion for Employment Law and Labour Matters. Email: mrussell.ja@gmail. com.


    Source: Nation


  21. DLP leadership issues deep-rooted
    By Ezra Alleyne

    The serious problems facing the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) did not happen overnight. These seeds were sown 35 years ago in 1987 on the very day that our first Prime Minister Errol Barrow died at high noon.
    My deep interest in constitutional politics caused me to be concerned then that, through no fault of his, the process which resulted in Sir Lloyd Erskine Sandiford taking over as Prime Minister was seriously flawed.
    I am not afraid to say I told you so because I did.
    No political party in a mature democracy gets red washed or whitewashed in successive General Elections in the absence of some Earth-quaking shifting of the tectonic plates of the philosophy formerly informing that party’s policies.
    In my judgement, Sir Lloyd was the right man to become Prime Minister after Mr Barrow died. Months before his death, Barrow identified Sandiford as his successor in his famous declaration that “After me it is Sandy, then Phillip Greaves and then any number can play.”
    Wise deliberate thinker that he was, I believe that Barrow had already discerned the cracks in his carefully laid succession plan.
    Kingmaker
    The problem was not the choice per se of Mr Sandiford; rather it was the process that was used by his kingmaker.
    Here is what I mean. A young and vastly inexperienced David Thompson wrote in an article in the Daily Nation at the time that after Prime Minister Sandiford returned from being sworn in, a meeting was called and support declared.
    My response was that a major breach of the convention that the prime minister ought to get the approval of his colleagues before and not after swearing-in had happened.
    So disturbed was I by this development that I wrote with Harold Hoyte’s (the late
    Nation founder and Editor-in-Chief) permission a series of three consecutive articles and I concluded that we had not yet heard the last of this major breach of the Westminster conventions.
    Being a prime minister is such a difficult job that prior approval of those who would be led is necessary since every politician is ambitious.
    As a Prime Minister, Sandiford displayed several leadership qualities but the no-confidence motion filed by Owen Arthur cleverly exploited the foundational cracks within the DLP, which the late Sir James Cameron Tudor had identified when he declared that Tom Adams and Mr Barrow could rule so easily but that Mr Sandiford could only advance his policies by hotly contested inches.
    In bare trouble
    The 1994 General Election confirmed that the DLP as a party was in bare trouble. In his book Politics & Society (Page 64), Sir Lloyd wrote that he was persuaded to relinquish his position as the party’s political leader prematurely and did not lead his party into the 1994 election.
    Thompson was assigned that role. I noted this
    development. By that time, Richie Haynes had left the DLP and formed the National Democratic Party (NDP). There had been no leadership contest and any chance of being Barrow’s successor was gone.
    Party unity was not revived after 1994. Thompson also lost the 1999 General Election to Arthur and then leadership shenanigans reasserted themselves.
    Clyde Mascoll was elected leader and led the party in the 2003 General Election, raising the representation in Parliament to seven.
    Once again, leadership became an issue, and in the run-up to the 2008 General Election the DLP threw Mascoll under the bus and Thompson again grabbed the political leadership.
    He won the 2008 election and Mascoll joined the Barbados Labour Party as Minister in the Ministry of Finance.
    The 2008 General Election saw Thompson installed as Prime Minister properly and correctly and with every chance on paper of settling the party, but within two years Thompson was dead and once again shenanigans about leadership surfaced.
    Eager Eleven
    Freundel Stuart became Prime Minister and set about stabilising the ship of state when, on his first trip overseas, the story of the Eager Eleven broke, suggesting that effort to unseat him were or might be afoot.
    Stuart won the 2013 election by the narrowest of margins, 16-14, but not even his calm manner could cement the issue of how the party should properly respect its leaders.
    He lost to Mia Amor Mottley 30-0 in spite of his valiant efforts. Verla De Peiza, the history of whose travails is too recent to recount, took over.
    The challenge of Rev. Guy Hewitt and the reported meeting in Black Rock, plus public calls for her removal weeks before the election, speak volumes.
    The current problems within the DLP are structural and have deep roots. The public is discerning. They are not prepared to entrust the governance of this country to a party that cannot line up in a united manner behind a single leader.
    And who now will be their political leader still remains unsettled.
    Ezra Alleyne is an attorney and a former Deputy Speaker of the House of Assembly.

    Source: Nation


  22. Our ‘Senate’ is improperly constituted

    As a matter of common sense, and in this special constitutional context, a Senate seat cannot “become vacant” unless and until a person has been appointed to sit in it.
    By Garth Patterson As a core constitutional and democratic value and principle, the rule of law mandates the principle of legality – the requirement of ‘government according to law’: Honourable Mr Justice Jamadar, Judge of the Caribbean Court of Justice.
    Section 36 of the Constitution unambiguously declares: “The Senate shall consist of twenty-one persons who, being qualified for appointment as Senators in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution, have been so appointed in accordance with the provisions of this section.”
    It provides that the 21 senators must be appointed by the President, 12 of whom are appointed in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister, two on the advice of the Leader of the Opposition, and seven independent senators are appointed in the discretion of President.
    The Senate is not an abstract constitutional concept; rather, it is a legislative body, comprised of a collective of 21 persons, that has life breathed into it, and whose existence and purpose are defined by the provisions of the Constitution. It has a definite lifespan that begins when it is duly constituted in accordance with section 36 and terminates on the dissolution of Parliament. The lifespan of the last Senate in Barbados was ended on December 27, 2021, when the President, acting on the advice of the Prime Minister, dissolved Parliament.
    The functions, powers and procedures of the Senate are provided for in the Constitution, whose provisions must be read within the context and against the backdrop of a duly constituted Senate having come into being.
    Public Seal
    The starting point of any analysis, therefore, must logically be: when and how is the Senate duly constituted – when does it come into being? The answer is to be found in section 36 alone, which prescribes both the how and the when. The Senate is constituted by appointing the requisite number of persons (21) as Senators and it becomes a Senate when those persons “have been so appointed in accordance with the provisions of” section 36. All 21 Senators must be appointed by the President by instrument under Public Seal. Until 21 persons have been so appointed, then there is no “Senate”, within the meaning of section 36. And any business purported to be conducted by the Senate so improperly constituted will be null and void.
    Moreover, the Constitution mandates that the first order of business of the Senate shall be the election of its President and Deputy President. The office of President and Deputy President must be elected by “the Senate”, meaning all 21 of its members. An election to any such office can only be valid if every person who is entitled to be appointed as Senator has an opportunity to participate in the election. If the Senate is (improperly) constituted with only 18 Senators, then the eventual occupants of the seats in respect of which appointments are outstanding will clearly be disenfranchised and unconstitutionally excluded from this important constitutional process. Of course, this Government is no stranger to that concept.
    21 persons
    The Government and its surrogates have, in response to my remarks in the Press on this issue, suggested that it is “rubbish” and “simplistic” to assert that a Senate must consist of 21 persons. If they are correct, then the Constitution itself is a simpleton, because that is what it states, in plain, unequivocal, simple language. They point to section 50(2) of the Constitution and argue that it lends validity to a Senate that comprises less than 21 persons.
    That section states that each House (that is, the House of Assembly and the Senate) may act notwithstanding any vacancy in its membership. But that section must be read in conjunction with section 36 and section 39(1), which deals with the tenure of the seats of Senators and outlines the circumstances under which vacancies in the Senate might occur. It declares, “The seat of a Senator shall become vacant . . . ”, then lists the circumstances under which a senate seat becomes vacant, including “upon the next dissolution of Parliament after he has been appointed.”
    Until the Senate is duly constituted, there is no Senate and the provisions regulating its powers, functions and procedures are not, therefore, engaged. As a matter of common sense, and in this special constitutional context, a Senate seat cannot “become vacant” unless and until a person has been appointed
    to sit in it.
    The fallacy of the Government’s argument is that a Senate may be constituted by appointing 18 persons and that the actions of a Senate so constituted are validated because the unfilled seats are “vacant” seats for the purposes of section 50(2).
    That argument flies in the face of the clear language of the Constitution, which does not state that the Senate may consist of “up to”, or “no more than”, 21 Senators. It states, the Senate “shall consist of 21 persons” (no more, no less). This is the language that constitutes the Senate – defines what a “Senate” is and how it must be composed. Until that magic, constitutionally mandated, number of 21 is achieved, no Senate comes into existence.
    If there is no properly constituted Senate, then the provisions governing the procedures of the Senate, such as section 50(2), can have no application. That provision, like the section providing for a quorum, may only be engaged after the Senate has had life breathed into it. Hence, a Senate that was properly constituted from inception may nevertheless continue to function notwithstanding a vacancy in its membership that is created in the circumstances outlined in section 39(1), or by other circumstances not specifically mentioned, including debilitating illness or death.
    It may conduct business even though all its members are not present in the chamber, provided there is a quorum of eight senators besides the President. These provisions all contemplate, and assume, for their valid operation, that a Senate has been duly constituted, and has come into being, in accordance with section 36.
    Then there is the misinformed suggestion that the Government may amend the Constitution by way an Act of Parliament passed by both Houses, even though the Senate only has 18 members. The power to amend the Constitution is conferred by section 49, which requires that for a Bill for the amendment of the Constitution to be passed, it must it be supported by the votes of not less than a simple majority, or in some instances, a special two-thirds majority, “of all the members of the House.” So, for example, the proposed amendment to reduce the age qualification for Senators to 18 years, requires the votes of not less than two-thirds of all the members of the House. This phrase is to be contrasted with the language used in section 53, which states that all questions proposed for decision in the Senate shall be determined by a majority of the votes of the members thereof “present and voting”.
    A majority of all the members of the Senate is a different creature from a majority of the members present and voting. This means that the special majority required to amend the Constitution must be achieved by the voting of all the members of the Senate. If the Senate must consist of 21 Senators, then any proposed constitutional amendment that is approved by a majority of some lesser number of duly appointed Senators will be unconstitutional, null and void.
    As a fundamental precept, it is imperative that, in the discharge of its mandate to govern, this Government unconditionally adheres to the rule of law. The Constitution, as our supreme law, is the fountain from which the rule of law springs; and that, unlawful creature that was spawned by the appointment of 18 Senators, which the Government now seeks to pass off as our Senate, lacks any constitutional legitimacy.
    Its existence, and any purported actions taken by it, including the solemn and consequential enactment of amendments to our Constitution, is repugnant to, and violates the Constitution and the rule of law, and the Government’s attempt to foist it upon us should be roundly condemned by all rightthinking Barbadians. We deserve more than a Government by whim and fancy – we should demand one that is uncompromising in its commitment to the rule of law.
    As the new Government of our nascent Republic, it must do better than that.

    Garth Patterson is a senior counsel.

    Source: Nation


  23. Garth Patterson
    Nailed it
    A clear explanation / legal interpretation of how vacany law is applied under the Constitution
    So clear and explanatory that it begs the question
    Why people like Gregory Nicholls is so ready and quick to give so much power to the PM
    Frightening and highly disturbing that those who are sworn to protect justice in this fair land are quick easy and ready to turn over the full.reigns of power to a one state govt
    Oh what a tangle web weaved when we practice to deceive in light of sound evidence
    As for the PM. the word “offer” is not written into the Constitution and for good reason
    Think about that


  24. All we have are legal opinions. For every lawyer who agrees there is another who disagrees.


  25. Now back to square one the instrument containing the laws of a democracy prescribing to good governance and how our country must be governed
    PM use of smoke and mirrors and gimmicks would not work and cannot work while the Constitution is adamant and precise as to how Parliament is constituted
    Also how laws can be amended in a democracy and passed
    Free advice from Garth Patterson
    Those who have ears to hear let them hear
    Today I can pat myself on the back and say although my language pertaining to this issue might not have been as precise or clear in its merit of interpretation
    Nevertheless I was as close to and in my language to the protection of the Constitution and how far removed govt has been in doing so ( in reference to this issue)
    Actually I was right


  26. @Blackett

    Please refuse the offer to recommend DLP Senators, please!


  27. DavidFebruary 6, 2022 6:31 AM

    @Blackett

    Please refuse the offer to recommend DLP Senators, please
    Xxccx
    Blackett can turn to the CCJ for opinion before saying yea or nay
    Blackett has legally the right to seek differing opinions
    Relinquishing all.Power to govt should be of more concern to u yard bird


  28. Hard to.imagine how the PM can take simple language in the Constitution and turn it into a mess
    A mess so bad causing division within the country
    How can the PM speaks of a divided country yet put missteps and road blocks in the way that causes doubt and confusion
    How can the PM place hand on the Bible swears to protect the Constitution and then take it upon herself to wrestle the Constitution to the ground
    What kind of a political animal is this
    Is this who she is
    That is the burning question


  29. Legal experts like to use flashing lights to obscure and obstruct and blind citizens from knowing and seeing the naked truth
    It would have to take a person very mentally challenged not to understand the intent of the Constitution and its Laws
    The laws and interpretation points to occurrences whereby govt might pave the way towards obstruction to gain public support and sympathy
    Govt use.of political language and mechanism as being authors of benevolence
    The Constitution was written in a time when might and power ruled and the framers at that time was well.in tuned with the political animal that lend itself to self interest over reaching and overarching along with overlooking what was best for the country
    Presently as the debate continues those with keen and observing eyes can see the intent of this govt vs the intent of the laws of the Constitution
    The Constitution a legal and binding document being tested but in its rightful use can be the Saving grace of this Society despite govt /PM attempts to undermine its intentions


  30. David
    Patterson’s analysis is correct.
    Where he is completely wrong however, is in thinking that Bajans give a shit about ‘right and wrong’.
    Eva since Fruendel dig up the Garrison and planted that devil monument, every shiite has been headed downhill (as Bushie predicted at the time) ESPECIALLY for the DLP.
    Check carefully and you will see that the various commentaries from ‘NON native locals’ mostly tend to be logical, focused and intelligent, …while our local ‘experts’ are clearly warped by the mendicancy of political polarization…
    The damn place has become a pack of ‘ac’ clones…..
    The end will not be pretty.


  31. @Bush Tea

    At this stage as Justice Cumberbatch opined the language in our constitution is turgid and lends itself to interpretations.


  32. Bush tea

    The damn place has become a pack of ‘ac’ clones…..
    Xxxxc
    Bush tea welcome back from the grave uh old demon
    Yuh open yuh mout and the same ole regurgitating response jumps out
    Time uh head back to the same ole musty closet yuh been hiding
    Guh long do.nuh body wants to hear yuh Ole tired worn out utterances
    Time yuh turn a new leaf
    Yuh a.rse is grass the weed whacker broken rusty and dull.no longer working
    PM has yuh a.ss buried in Ghana wid them duppy bones
    There is not way out even the Constitution is at high risk
    Don’t worry about ac …ac in a safe and comfortable place
    Yuh Ole boar


  33. Catching up…

    Unlike the ‘brilliant one’, all I will say to you is ‘Have a great day’

    Have a great day, Barbados


  34. White Vs Black Civil Rights Fights
    JFK shot 1963
    Malcolm X shot 1965
    MLK shot 1968
    Robert F. Kennedy 1968

    Woodstock Vs Summer of Soul in Harlem 1969
    Gospel day

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZYoB-lb2FM


  35. February 6, 2022 7:19 AM

    @Bush Tea

    At this stage as Justice Cumberbatch opined the language in our constitution is turgid and lends itself to interpretations.

    Xcccccc
    U would resort to any thing that fits your purpose than cling to facts and the laws of the Constitution
    What is so hard to understand how many members constitutes a Parliament
    What are they designated duties in acting upon legislation
    Even a blind man on a trotting horse can understand numbers and importance of numbers to the equality or total amounts
    I really laughed out very loud when so called intellectualls cannot understand simple logistics framed in a manner for good governance


  36. Help..
    I think the great EA is opening on a different item than the question being asked.
    EA is assuming that we have a senate and what is required to meet. The question being addressed is ‘do we have a senate before it is fully constituted’. I think that is where GP3 is going.

    Funny thing, EA is branded as a constitutional expert but his piece this morning is self promotional and the little CBC snippet has him contorting the issue to be a constitutional yes man.


  37. If it so straight forward why have we not seen legal challenges?


  38. Opening=opining
    I think the great EA is opining on a different item than the question being asked.


  39. The GG now president is a former high court judge appointed by the Stuart administration.


  40. Excellent analysis TheO
    The question is about the initial CREATION of the body, not to be confused with the ongoing operations of an existing senate.
    Anyway, the REAL problem is the loss of national PRIDE that once placed truth and honesty ABOVE partisan idiocy.

    @David
    Jeff is a ‘Bushie hero’ as you well know, HOWEVER he is probably more responsible for the lotta asinine ‘lawyers’ masquerading as ‘intelligent’ bout here than anyone else in Barbados.
    You don’t think that Jeff was smart enough to recognize these morons when they were students?
    He could have failed the lotta idiots and let them go and drive ZRs or something usefull….
    Steupsss.


  41. @Bush Tea

    LOL


  42. DavidFebruary 6, 2022 8:03 AM

    If it so straight forward why have we not seen legal challenges
    Xxxxxxx
    From whom may I ask ?
    Challenges comes to a head when a reaching point of exhaustion sees no end in sight or comes to a complete halt


  43. The blogmaster hereby issues a rescind order on the 2022 general election.

    Seriously, as Donna keep commenting – with a rudderless DLP and no alternative the result should another 31-0!


  44. @ David

    Why waste your time.

    When someone keeps referring to the Constitution and makes the erroneous comment that it “IMPLIES that preference should be given to the PARTY that ACQUIRES” the second most accumulated votes from which to choose Opposition Senators……. you know they HAVE NOT actually READ the document, but only BLUFFING their way through the discussion, ‘making up things as they go,’ while ‘riding’ on ‘hear say’ and other people’s opinions.


  45. Last comment David…
    You are confused about this issue of the DLP’s failings.
    THAT IS NOT THE PROBLEM.
    The DLP committed suicide when Froon and Co built the ‘tabernacle’ on the Garrison… with the pitch fork.
    The REAL PROBLEM is that they have taken the rest of Barbados along for the ride, and we are here thinking ‘poor DLP’ when it is poor Barbados…

    Here is Bushie’s summary…
    The same way that the BLP has now seen the wisdom of bringing Jamaicans to manage the – Cave which was not performing, ..and the same way that the DLP brought Trinis to manage the Bank – which we could not handle…

    Why are we not hiring some outside politicians to sort out these issues – starting with Patterson as AG?
    Have a good day boss.


  46. This comment was placed on the wrong page
    Hence I forward here
    Xxxxx

    I would not advicingly or otherwise tell Blackett what position to take on this issue yea or nay
    But one must becareful of a power setting precedent
    One which in the future can turn over much power to any leader to ammend the Constitution at will
    When the Constitution has already laid out defined laws to follow
    This issue is one of such in which a PM sets out to inject power and interpretation using the word “offer “to gain political power and support
    Needless to say the Constitution is legally written in language as a way forward for govt not to use political language as a sign of goodwill towards individuals groups or parties but as an aspect for the benevolence of the safety and security of all the people and country


  47. @Artax

    Trying to make her understand that any allocation to the DLP allowed to pick 2 requires the government moving an amendment to the constitution which it has and should not be confused with the other argument whether the parliament is legally constituted.

    Head like moon rock.


  48. Re: Health Matters

    Barbados needs a Sublime Virture Wushu Centre for Learning

    👊 天天衝拳100次|改善肩痛寒背.刺激五臟健康.幫助腸胃消化|Punch Every Day| Improve Shoulder Pain|Help Digestion

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading