Crisis of Governance – No Damn Labour Party (NDLP)

Mia Mottley

The Barbados Labour Party (BLP) was founded in 1938 and the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) in 1955. For many the BLP and DLP dubbed the Duopoly are the only political parties we know. In recent years both political parties have been criticized for not being sufficiently progressive to sustain a quality life for the majority of Barbadians, present and future generations. Noticeable has been the inability of alternative parties to establish themselves as credible alternatives in a ready environment.

In 2018 and 2022 the BLP won both general elections with an unprecedented consecutive 30 to zero result. While political supporters of the duopoly have understandably contrasting feelings about the results, the more independent minded continue to be very concerned. 

A strong democracy depends on quality political parties. Strong political parties depend on quality members. In recent years both DLP and BLP have been unable to attract quality individuals to stem rising voter apathy and cynicism. No need to listen to the taking heads who try to justify declining voter turnout with statistical speak. Unbiased political pundits agree that today’s voter across the globe “appear to be turning away from traditional political organizations”. It forces the question – can the democracy practiced in Barbados survive without fit for purpose political parties?

The Barbados system of government which is a parody of the Westminster system is predicated on the “public’s trust in the integrity of government”, one that embodies “a framework of ethics, professionalism and transparency”. It has become obvious EXCEPT for rabid partisan supporters our political system has been hijacked- whether it is because of a less than meritorious selection of candidates or anonymous sources of funding for political parties that flavour how decisions are made when politicians ascend to government. There is a growing bloc of disenchanted citizens- here and elsewhere- who represent a view the time has come to usher in a more direct participation by citizens to how we govern. Find ways to diminish the role of political parties and the professional political class. The days of the ‘grassroot’ politician whose sole objective was to selflessly serve the public is a faded ideal.

Barbados presents a good case study to prove the notion of a system of government failing because of a declining political party system. There is the BLP with its charismatic maximum leader- remove Mottley from the BLP leadership and there is a good chance the party will flounder to mimic the death throes being exhibited by the DLP. In the meantime and in between time the people are left with no option than to vote for twiddledee or twiddledum.

The majority of Barbadians despite our boast of being an educated people hesitate to discuss governance issues in a meaningful way. That is unless cloaked in a salacious, adversarial and contentious theme. There is the saying, a people always get the government it deserves. Across the globe this is being witnessed.

116 comments

  • Magnificent a.k.a Magno – Yu Heard Formula: C₂₁H₃₀O₂ IUPAC ID: (−)-(6aR,10aR)-6,6,9-trimethyl- 3-pentyl-6a,7,8,10a-tetrahydro- 6H-benzo[c]chromen-1-ol

    DLP are the epitome of the worst of Barbados Politics
    Complacency
    Incompetency
    Corruption
    They are being punished for 10 years of fraudulent masquerading damaging the nation

    Like

  • In the last election the people did not get the govt it deserved
    Govt all but rolled out a well planned strategy for the election called in game ship terms a Fix
    A plan which would be well remembered by generations now and after as the greatest Fix of all times
    An election so well planned and presented while knowing the obvious outcome one which would be driven by the people’s fear because of the pandemic forcing people to stay away from the polls which would have given govt an obvious advantage
    Added to the mix the Supreme Leader having a say as to who should vote while cutting off the hands of those who were not allowed to vote by PM declaration
    The extreme by which the PM made with strategic assurance a perfect win is sound and cannot be refuted
    History however would have the last word as whether or not in this instance during a pandemic and a govt having all it’s cards placed in correct position and wheels set in motion
    If We the People truly and rightfully govt the govt it deserved

    Like

  • ♜ ♞ ♝ ♛ ♚ ♝ ♞ ♜
    ♟︎ ♟︎ ♟︎ ♟︎ ♟︎ ♟︎ ♟︎ ♟︎
    ♙ ♙ ♙ ♙ ♙ ♙ ♙ ♙
    ♖ ♘ ♗ ♕ ♔ ♗ ♘ ♖
    Mia was playing chess and showed her superiority on opponents by mating them by the “Kings Mate”.

    Like

  • @AC
    Not getting your vision

    When all is said and done, apart from a few who had covid-19, all who were eligible were allowed to vote.

    Most chose not to vote.
    The DLP barely got out of their slumber, followed by a fight for leadership and then one of the antagonists disappeared. Fumble awoke from his sleep and his description of his leadership period was not consistent with what the average Barbadian thought.
    Mia out fought, outfoxed and out ran her opponents. There was no fix.
    If the English guy (pun intended) returns in 2026 without having toiled in the vineyard, then we will see a next massacre.

    The DLP appears to lack the hunger and the will to survive in the wilderness.

    As we are now seeing these jokers preparing to sleep until 2026 we might see the early election stunt repeated to the same result.

    You can run your mouth, but your party isn’t running. They are turning off possible supporters.

    Funny, if after all of the fancy talk all of the history and our talk of pedigree, our politics just turn out to be opportunists banding together every five years.

    Liked by 2 people

  • Everything in life is a lesson from the Universe or God including or especially all of your biggest failuress.
    So DLP talking heads should be now able to expound deeply on what specifically these lessons of losing 2 elections with fuck all were.
    If not, then they still have not learned the basics.
    We await to hear their wisdom healing.

    Like

  • How can DLP help the nation
    when they can’t help themselves
    (rhetorical Q)
    as they can’t

    FEELING ENERGY In Your Hands in Just One Minute | Energy Meditation

    Like

  • TheOGazertsMarch 24, 2022 6:32 AM

    @AC
    Not getting your vision

    When all is said and done, apart from a few who had covid-19, all who were eligible were allowed to vote

    Xxxxx
    Oh course not u would not get the gist of my observation
    Check the numbers of those in isolation centres and those who were isolated at home
    Plus those unaccounted for would not have been included
    Facts are facts and avoiding the truth of all that occurred cannot be dismissed
    A clean and fair election bodes on a waiting safe period during the pandemic to call the election or one of having all the correct mechanism in place to have a election absent of denying anyone their Constitutional rights sick or welln
    Needles to say that those who showed up had the ability to do so and did not absent themselves out of fear
    There are two sides to a coin and this is my side

    Like

  • African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved

    “Funny, if after all of the fancy talk all of the history and our talk of pedigree, our politics just turn out to be opportunists banding together every five years.”

    that;s all it is has ever been, they did not even create the initial scam themselves,,,just brought it down to the lowest possible level where they reside to meet their greedy needs and expectations…and that of their political pimps and fowls..

    nothing to see here….as usual..

    Liked by 1 person

  • It is no surprise a critique is offered about the fit for purpose of our governance system and as usual all some of you can do is focus on the symptoms.

    Like

  • William Skinner

    @ David
    Agreed. Here you are attempting to unearth the obvious apathy but it becomes a post mortem on the DLP. The real truth is that a great majority of voters have no interest in the Duopoly. Its just that this disillusionment , has peaked, at a time when Mottley can exploit it to the maximum. That being said, one cannot ignore that the DLP , has contributed greatly to the current state. However, it goes way beyond that. Look around our country and we see where basic governance has failed under both with equal measure. A revived DLP will not halt the apathy; all it will do is give us a chance to have the return of the full election entertainment show. The same show we have had over the last forty years. Closest thing to Kadooment !!

    Like

  • THEO
    RE You can run your mouth, but your party isn’t running.
    SURELY YOU ERR SIR
    THE DLP CONTINUES TO RUN FERVENTLY FURIOUSLY AND FURTIVELY IN THE PERSON OF ITS REPRESENTIVE AC WHO HAS THE RUNNINGS-
    SHE EFFLUXES VERBAL DIARRHOEA PERENNIALLY PERPETUALLY AND PERSISTENTLY, BUT TO NO AVAIL.

    RE The DLP appears to lack the hunger and the will to survive in the wilderness.
    SEEING THAT THERE ARE NO POLITICAL JOSHUA’S OR CALEB’S TO LEAD THEM INTO A PROMISED LAND, IT SEEMS VERY LIKELY THAT THE DLP WILL DIE IN THE POLITICAL WILDERNESS, AND IT WILL NOT TAKE 40 YEARS EITHER.
    GOD IS GOOD, AND WILL NOT ALLOW AC TO EITHER PERCIEVE OR LIVE LONG ENOUGH TO ACTUALLY SEE THIS. BUT SHE WILL CONTINUE TO BARK AND BRAY AND BRIMBLE, AND PROVIDE US WITH MUCH MIRTH DAILY

    THIS IS SOUND DOCTRINE THAT CAN NOT BE REFUTED

    Liked by 1 person

  • African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved

    trying to force interest in the useless and DYSFUNCTIONAL is a nonstarter.

    ..it’s akin to pimping for mindless fowls and followers to join the congo line…..just to make up larger numbers/members of the under educated and uncognizant…

    disrespectful and insulting….

    Like

  • RE as usual all some of you can do is focus on the symptoms.
    FOLK TEND TO FOCUS ON SYMPTOMS WHEN THERE IS NO OBVIOUS CURE ON THE HORIZON. OR WHEN DIABOLICAL PERSONS OR ILLITERATES MISHANDLE THE SITUATION
    ANY ONE WITH A BRAIN CAN EXTRAPOLATE THIS RECENTLY OBSERVED PRINCIPLE AS DISPLAYED IN A SIMPLE MEDICAL MATTER TO THE POLITICAL SITUATION
    HEAD IS NOT NOW, NOR HAS IT EVER BEEN BRAIN.
    AND THIS CAN NOT BE REFUTED

    Liked by 1 person

  • African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved

    We already identified the slave minded…….throughout the pandemic…

    .now we know the 60% of the population on the island who REFUSE to get involved in their own demise via the traitors of parliament….are the MOST INTELLIGENT people on the island and the ones most likely to do what’s necessary, that will come naturally…

    the others are going exactly where they belong…

    Like

  • NorthernObserver

    @TheO
    Don’t you know that half of Barbadian voters were in isolation? And it affected D supporters the most?
    The fix was in. Where have you heard this before…lol.
    Facts, truth and morals.
    And they produce zero. Seems the voters aren’t buying the poet’s version.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @William

    BU is a microcosm of wider society. Do you listen to the local talk shows for example? The same narratives from the same talking heads all day long. All the while apathy and cynicism continue to rise in the population. If you do the research you will observe this is a global trend. Possibly has to do with the convergence of social media acting as fifth column and the fourth estate relinquishing its role.

    Liked by 1 person

  • They are those who would continue to.bury head in the sand about the truthfulness of the election
    The fact remains Govt started our wrong even though the Constitution said differently
    Ends with a win that calls several questions into asking for accountability
    Who said that plenty tomatoes can reap corn?
    That is the lesson learned from this election result
    In other words garbage in
    Garbage out

    Like

  • William read the following objectives/agenda items stated by Australia in 2008! Australia has the Westminster model as its core as well.

    ———-

    Government’s expectations of APS

    On 30 April 2008, the Prime Minister set out the seven elements of the Government’s vision for the future Australian Public Service:

    Reinvigorating the Westminster tradition of an independent public service with merit-based selection processes and continuity of employment when governments change
    Building a professional public service committed to excellence
    Developing evidence-based policy making processes as part of a robust culture of policy contestability
    Enhancing the strategic policy capability of the public service
    Strengthening the integrity and accountability of government
    Broadening participation in government through inclusive policy processes
    A contemporary view of government service delivery that emphasises both efficiency and effectiveness in outcomes.

    https://legacy.apsc.gov.au/reinvigorating-westminster-tradition-integrity-and-accountability-relations-between-australian

    Like

  • WS

    Correction

    The great majority of people are not interested In the duoply ( OR ANY OTHER PARTY )

    Liked by 1 person

  • @John 2

    Have you thought about the fact their disinterest lies in how citizens have sat back and allowed the system to be hijacked? Where there is no leadership what do you expect? Did we separate the lawlessness at large in the society, a moribund court system, a less than meritorious system in public sector management, declining standards, values lack of ethical behaviour etc?

    For years anti America has been bellowing about the need to implement a system which holds political parties accountable. Instead he s ridiculed by all and sundry.

    Like

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    @Northern, maybe you had ‘Folgers in your cup’ this morning … sorta like I did… when I read the @AC diatribe I immediately thought of that same reference … that would normally get me to give a 🤣or 🥳 … but when you see the abjectly dangerous extent to which one misguided partisan took his ridiculous verbiage it gives one pause to realize that folks like this @AC character can also be very dangerous if given the opportunity even in our little spheres !

    @David, we will always disagree on this real world issue of the rise and influence of the ‘ political party’. You treat a very significant matter with very broad brush strokes when you know it requires almost a ‘paint by numbers’ detailed multi-brush, multi-colored treatment. …

    And @Skinner, the duopoly hook makes the point forcibly, however, what you (and too @David) NEVER offer are the viable paths for difference … this becomes most glaring when you sir were part of the most credible third party EVER in Bdos and it DIED on the vine in under — what 10 years or less! …. It then becomes doubly glaring when the DLP performed so badly going into 2018 and NOT one of the other parties were considered adequate nor ‘fit for purpose’ by a majority of Bajans.

    Sorry guys… the symptoms (indication of a disorder or disease, especially a subjective one such as “apathy”) are plainly visible as to why third parties don’t get traction in Bim … (no time to prolix – but a careful look at party politics in Europe, Canada , the region gives ample answers) so suffice to say ‘WHAT in hell DIFFERENCE does a GPII or Lynette Eastmond offer Bajans ‘.

    Barrow clearly differentiated himself from Adams … and Haynes very clearly did the same from Sandiford. Alas, however, he yet had no definitive competitive advantage, nor compelling policy differentiating narrative to sustain his party agenda beyond his strong personal appeal. We go over this time and time again and expect some magic wand of inspiration … not going to happen.

    Where is the differentiating Green voice ; or the one that speaks to a realistic upending of economic policy (is there even such a viable option not already reviewed) … this is not a simple essay of theory guys… it’s REAL.

    WHY do we need a third party is the question I would ask??? …. What will they do that these now do not??
    Is a change in the musical chairs beneficial simply because you say so? …. Does a third or fourth part change “our politics [from] opportunists banding together every five years.” (as the blogger @Theo surmises)

    I GET the disillusionment guys … but based on what we have done re NDP etc I DON”T get the prescription being suggested.

    I gone… No prolix and then that … phew SMH (at me) I gone, sight.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ David

    The problem is, some DEMS supporters are refusing to face the reality that the DLP did not present itself to the electorate, as being prepared and competent to govern the affairs of Barbados…. and would’ve lost the election, whether or not they were called before or even after the pandemic.

    Firstly, Verla DePeiza was a ‘piss poor’ president, who lost in every election she contested. The lady did not demonstrate she was ‘Prime Minister material.’ All one had to do was to analyze her tenure as president of the DLP.
    Lorenzo’s assessment of her being the ‘night watchman’ was ‘spot on.’

    Secondly, the party was constrained by internal ‘back biting and infighting.’ I’m sure you recall the challenges for the presidency by George Pilgrim, who subsequently resigned, and Guy Hewitt. Although Verla fought off her challengers, the DLP remained ‘divided.’
    It was clearly noticeable that the ‘Hewitt faction’ did not support her during the election campaign.

    Thirdly, the DEMS did not offer the electorate any creative and progressive alternative socioeconomic policy initiatives, preferring instead to remain in ‘criticise mode.’
    Mottley gave the DEMS so much ammunition to attack her, but they refused to forcibly do so. And, any attempts made, were lacklustered.

    Fourthly, how did the DEMS expected to win the elections, with a ‘piss poor’ campaign manager and campaign strategy?

    BU contributors continue to demonstrate to the DLP how challenging and criticising Mottley is done. Rather than take example from them, they send their ‘attack dogs and foot soldiers’ to BU to ‘flog dead horses’ and talk unsubstantiated, illogical shiite, while exposing their stupidity in the process.

    The other reality is, COVID-19 is ‘here to stay.’ So, the shiite talk about calling the elections during the pandemic and a few people not being allowed to vote as a result, is silly.
    Even if they were allowed to vote, where is the evidence to suggest the outcome would’ve been different?

    The BEES were able to mobilize their supporters and garner the relevant support during the same pandemic. Why were the DEMS unable to do similarly?

    Are they suggesting the people who “absent themselves out of fear” were DLP supporters, hence 30-0?

    I’m sure we won’t be reading the shiite they’re now spewing, if the DLP had won the general elections.

    Liked by 2 people

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ David Bu at 9 : 36 AM

    The lists of goals you relayed from the recent policy statement of the PM of Australia was implemented 50 years ago by the GoB. There were at least two ministries devoted to the process. You should ask why these ministries were abandoned and replaced by a weaker ministry with no clear focus of continuous improvement.
    RE : Voter apathy.
    Blame the call in programs for this malaise. The political propagandists ,far from putting their parties in a good light,have everybody fed up. I hope BU does not fall into that category.
    Recent political discussions did not connect with the concerns of the citizens but with political maneuverings and one- up -manship… We need to get our priorities right. Once a party is elected to office the citizens expect it to get on with the business of managing the affairs of state. We need to cut out the “palaver” .

    Liked by 1 person

  • @Dee Word

    Have you wondered that inviting discussion is part of being solution oriented? Sometimes answers are found through collaboration.

    Like

  • @Vincent

    Are you referring to Public Sector Reform under OSA?

    Like

  • @Artax

    What you outlined was obvious to a child. Link this back to the substantive issue and what do we have?

    Like

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ David BU

    I said 50 years ago. That would put it firmly in the EWB Administrative years. There was a ministry dealing with Establishment with a team of Systems analyst reviewing each ministry and recommending changes. TheTtreasury systems were also reviewed and re-engineered, . Branston Collymore and Harcourt Lewis were the leaders in this exercise.

    Like

  • Vincent Codrington

    I do not believe there is any crisis of Governance. I believe that there are too many idle brains around with solutions looking for problems. Indeed persons who should know better are wittingly and unwittingly seeking to create chaos.We have enough problems generated outside our control . Why are we creating internal diversionary mischief ?.

    Like

  • Crisis of Incompetence having a PM trying to set the groundwork for her legacy albeit that she is not in the same class as an Adam’s or a Barrow
    Hence she pushes forward with loose acumen with a belief that once she reaches the finishing line she has accomplished her goal even if she uses a young man to do so
    All the hoopla about 18 is measured in her own time capsule on legacy building

    Like

  • African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved

    the others are going exactly where they belong…

    William…and around and around they go, where they will get off,,,,nit even they know…lol…

    another 20 years or.more, or less, of this coming up……

    no positive results and no solutions….yammer, yammer, yammer…on and on…

    Like

  • African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved

    people are concerned with real problems not with small-time bullshit politics…that has gone NOWHERE in half century and will go NOWHERE in 10 more half centuries,,,,that’s for those who can’t see what’s directly in front of them to remain stuck in……

    “descent-based communities are treated less favourably, unequally, stigmatised, oppressed and ostracised – and we’re telling our governments we won’t stand for it.

    Descent-based discrimination segregates specific individuals and groups because of their inherited status at birth, descent, or ancestry. It’s widely embedded into our social structures and virtually unchangeable.

    But the historical injustices caused by the legacy of slavery and colonialism, and the continuing prevalence of racial discrimination, need to be acknowledged and addressed.

    As much as an alternative may feel far-removed from our realities today, we can start by understanding decent-based discrimination, how it manifests itself all over the world, and how we can continue fighting it wherever we see it.”

    Like

  • African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved

    “But the historical injustices caused by the legacy of slavery and colonialism, and the continuing prevalence of racial discrimination, need to be acknowledged and addressed.”

    that is the real problem… not which black skin….”white” mind traitor as*hole lied or stole to be elected to continue tiefing, taking bribes and betraying…. that one comes in a close second…only because they are the ones allowing all of the above to continue because that’s what TRAITORS DO….

    Like

  • @Vincent

    You should know the blogmaster’s methods to extract information from some of you by now.

    Like

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ David Bu at 3:18 PM
    I am quite aware of your methodology. I am prepared to assist .

    Like

  • “You should know the blogmaster’s methods to extract information from some of you by now.”

    truly
    I know nothing
    your honour
    i plead not guilty
    innocent

    Liked by 1 person

  • William Skinner

    @ DPD
    “Alas, however, he yet had no definitive competitive advantage, nor compelling policy differentiating narrative to sustain his party agenda beyond his strong personal appeal. We go over this time and time again and expect some magic wand of inspiration … not going to happen.”

    Obviously you did not attend any NDP meetings (1991)and you certainly did not read the party’s 1991 manifesto.
    I was a candidate in 1991 and my signature is on that manifesto. I can attest to the progressive nature of the document.
    You need to get your hands on a copy.
    Peace.

    Like

  • African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved

    So wait….yall been involuntarily having information squeezed out of yall by Blogmaster…damn, i never even knew that was what was going on here….so what happens to all that info and HOW is it being used, to what end….one might ask….

    Like

  • Vincent Codrington

    Wuh Loss!!!

    Some of us are not as bright as we presume. Lol!!!

    Liked by 1 person

  • “So wait….yall been involuntarily having information squeezed out of yall by Blogmaster…damn, i never even knew that was what was going on here….so what happens to all that info and HOW is it being used, to what end….one might ask….”

    where do you think politicians and media get their soundbites from
    it’s called negative feedback loops or homeostasis

    many ideas of mine have been robbed by those bastards / false leaders
    QE for GFR
    Scottish Referendum
    Obama going Centrist when he lost 2010 mid-terms
    Police support of Criminal Father of Murderer in Stephen Lawrence case
    I was the only one demanding Reparations before #BLACKLIVESMATTER

    Sometimes they steal ideas and do the opposite
    I wanted to sanction USA for their wars but they used it instead

    You can put ideas out there on the net and see them on TV next day

    Trump was a internet troll who went for conspiracies

    Liked by 1 person

  • Tibetan Music and Ambient Sounds of a Buddhism Moment

    Like

  • Ideas in public domain are put out for everyone and can go viral

    I was first to call Trump orange
    I was first to call Bush a warmonger

    Like

  • The beauty of the information highway is that you can lead, follow, drop-in, drop-out or even go your own way.

    Liked by 1 person

  • The statement ‘the constitution does not recognizes parties’ reminds of a woman who has been sleeping with a man for 56 years and claims that she is not married (not even common-law)

    She may very well be right, but it would be a foolish man who pursues her as his wife.

    Party is such an integral part of Bajan politics that it is folly to claim otherwise.

    Like

  • “The beauty of the information highway is that you can lead, follow, drop-in, drop-out or even go your own way.”

    There are spies everywhere
    and propagandists
    and racists
    Bu is the only place where you can say truths about white people without white people saying that’s racist and getting you banned

    Like

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ TheOGazerts
    Living with a man for 56 years does not make her legally his wife. . So in politics parties are recognized but they have constitutional rights.The constitution recognizes representatives of constituencies. The logical flaw is called ergodicity. Latin ” Propter hoc; ergo etc.”

    Liked by 1 person

  • de pedantic Dribbler

    @Skinner, but with much respect brother but a MANIFESTO … you hang your hat , so to say, on the fool’s gold of pretty words and promises.

    When you and the blogmaster speak of parties and the desire for a different political dynamic from the much maligned duopoly I surely do not expect that a ‘manifesto’ would be the raison d’etre of being ‘fit for purpose’.

    Come on brother your PARTY died a quiet death with the denouement of your leader’s star … the entire ‘fit for purpose’ mantra certainly demands that the words of any party live well past the founder, SURELY!

    As noted: ” a differentiating narrative *** to sustain his party agenda*** beyond his strong personal appeal”

    Again respectfully, but a manifesto itself is MEANINGLESS unless fulfilled. Come now!

    But you are right I never had the opportunity to attend an NDP meeting … thought the doc was absolutely outstanding, however!

    @Vincent… re “Some of us are not as bright as we presume. Lol!!!” Why you had to let the cat outta de bag, doah!

    Liked by 1 person

  • Vincent Codrington

    The algorithm is at it again. I am amazed how this error gets pass some people’s thinking that should know better.Parties have NO constitutional rights.

    Like

  • Governments have majorities in the lower house and can push new laws through
    upper house is supposed to review the laws and approve or send them back
    but there are already enough laws Governments don’t need more
    they should take all the superfluous laws off their books

    Liked by 1 person

  • (Quote):
    Parties have NO constitutional rights.
    (Unquote).
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    That sums it up rather neatly!

    That’s why the ‘Independent-minded’ senators were sober enough to express their intended ‘opposition’ to any amendment to the Constitution without a concomitant amendment to the said Supreme Law to recognize such political ‘beings’.

    When Bajan voters go into the voting booths to exercise their franchise they do not see any reference to political parties; either by name or by insignia.

    So how, then, can a piece of legislation which attempts to allocate seats in the Senate based on some formula involving the number of votes cast for ‘individual’ political parties be deemed Constitutionally sound?

    Liked by 1 person

  • Sometimes to prove a point the discussion is restricted to the head of a pin.

    My point was not about the appointment of senators, but that parties are the very fabric of all elections in Barbados. Whether, it has life in the constitution or not, everything is done via party.

    It amuses me when others rush in to point out how smart they are.

    Like

  • “When Bajan voters go into the voting booths to exercise their franchise they do not see any reference to political parties; either by name or by insignia.”

    Allow me to use this paragraph.

    That is true, but they are not voting on a clean slate. Before they entered the booth, they had a sound idea of what party a candidate belongs to. In fact, some voted are more for the party than the candidate. Party is not abandoned in the booth because names and insignia are absent.

    The process is not as sanitize as they would like you to believe.

    Like

  • @TheOGazerts March 24, 2022 6:00 PM “The statement ‘the constitution does not recognizes parties’ reminds of a woman who has been sleeping with a man for 56 years and claims that she is not married (not even common-law)>

    Or to put it succinctly “he int no family to me”

    Even though they were together from age 18/19 and have successfully raised 14 children to adulthood.

    Like

  • Party politics should only matter when deciding the Government
    After that Government should be working for people’s interests

    Liked by 1 person

  • @The OGazertsMarch 24, 2022 8:17 PM
    (Quote):
    That is true, but they are not voting on a clean slate. Before they entered the booth, they had a sound idea of what party a candidate belongs to. In fact, some voted are more for the party than the candidate. Party is not abandoned in the booth because names and insignia are absent.
    (Unquote).
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    That is patently the ‘de facto’ case.

    And that is why the majority of the electorate voted based on the ‘advice’ of the leader of the campaigning red political party by not giving the DLP any seats in the HoA.

    But on what Constitutional basis can seats in the Senate be allocated to a party which has failed to make not even a passing grade out of 30 subjects in the race to the HoA unless the Constitution is amended to reflect the role of the same political parties in the electoral system.

    Such an amendment would also involve some necessary adjustments to the legislation called the People’s Representation Act.

    No one is against the presence of any body having an ‘opposing’ voice in any room in the house of democracy. But let it be done the Constitutionally-right way!

    Liked by 1 person

  • “But on what Constitutional basis can seats in the Senate be allocated to a party which has failed to make not even a passing grade out of 30 subjects in the race to the HoA unless the Constitution is amended to reflect the role of the same political parties in the electoral system.”

    That was not my argument. I only wanted to point out that this was more about semantics than anything else.
    When all is said and done, anyone nominated by the president will be evaluated by party affiliation. Let’s hope she can find a couple of virgins.

    I don’t buy into the high reasoning of my fellow Barbadians. The DLP should have taken the two seats when offered. Bird in the hand reasoning.

    Like

  • “No one is against the presence of any body having an ‘opposing’ voice in any room in the house of democracy. But let it be done the Constitutionally-right way!”

    Are the people have Barbados capable of defining and implementing a better system of Governance improving on the flaws of it’s legacy systems or will they still remain stuck in the past more British than the British with it’s members only colonial clubs and political and upper class wealthy classes

    Like

  • @ The OGazertsMarch 24, 2022 8:56 PM
    “That was not my argument. I only wanted to point out that this was more about semantics than anything else.”
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Of course it’s all about semantics! That’s why the lawyers in the ongoing case about the ‘constitutionality’ of the Senate are about to make a killing in fees.

    That’s why there is so much argument over interpretation of the word “Shall” versus ‘Must’.

    That’s why the same Constitution should have read: ‘No more than 21 senators shall be appointed to the Senate’ and our friend GP No.3 would not have a legal leg to stand on.

    Liked by 1 person

  • “The DLP should have taken the two seats when offered. “

    It was surreal when they thought they shouldn’t accept the offer from the PM when they won zero seats and wanted legal advice on the grounds it might be unconstitutional. They outsmarted themselves and are not as smart as they think they are.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Cuhdear BajanMarch 24, 2022 8:18 PM

    @TheOGazerts March 24, 2022 6:00 PM “The statement ‘the constitution does not recognizes parties’ reminds of a woman who has been sleeping with a man for 56 years and claims that she is not married (not even common-law)>

    Or to put it succinctly “he int no family to me”

    Even though they were together from age 18/19 and have successfully raised 14 children to adulthood.

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    I once went to get my passport photo signed by an old time lawyer at Yearwood and Boyce, a family friend.

    He gave me a story about a woman who was in a common law relationship with a man and decided when he was sick and getting low to bring in the priest and some witnesses quick so he could officially marry them.

    She reckoned that would make her position unassailable as his legal wife.

    His wife had died leaving children so she wanted to secure her position at the top of the pecking order.

    No will she reasoned, legal wife gets all.

    Unbeknownst to her, the man had prepared a will leaving her well provided for as well as his children BUT he described her in his will as his common law wife a description she no longer fitted.

    Her chicanery was exposed to everyone because the man died without recovering from his illness and thus told no one he was married … he probably did not know himself.

    So it came as a shock to his children and all hell broke loose.

    It worked out ok as the children honoured their dead father’s wishes so she got something.

    I guess the old time lawyer was involved and talked sense into the man’s children.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ DPD
    I was more concerned with your reference to the party having no policies etc.
    I don’t where else outside of a platform, does a party explain its policies during an election.
    I am not “ hanging “ anything on a manifesto, I just think , you should get hold of a copy and read it.

    Like

  • African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved

    “Bu is the only place where you can say truths about white people without white people saying that’s racist and getting you banned”

    guess you weren’t on here when some of the nastiest racists you could want to find anywhere, local shite whites, foreign whites with too much say and arrogance, blacks pretending to be whites were on here terrorizing Black commenters, saying all types of dirty things, mostly lies to break the Black spirit and never got banned, not even a word of warning….where were you to moan and groan about all the LIES they were telling on Afrikan descended people….as opposed to any truth..

    ..i had to take them on by myself, too many balless weaklings were on here even then, and show them who is what…one by one they all crawled back into their mutlitple holes…it took years…

    Like

  • Minirex buck mating with a dwarf doe mix breed

    太极养生功法,在于心法吐纳柔细绵长,以达静以修身,动以畅达之功效。保持乐观豁达之心境,修得健全和谐快乐的生活。
    Duration: 0:06:04
    Taiji health-preserving exercises lie in the effect of the mind’s breathing being soft and long, so as to achieve tranquility for self-cultivation, and movement for smoothness. Maintain an optimistic and open-minded state of mind, and cultivate a healthy, harmonious and happy life.

    Like

  • African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved

    BU is the only blog where white racists and dirty politicians reigned supreme and coexisted as a team, i have been on many blogs many platforms and none of that is allowed anywhere unless it’s a blog strictly for racists and possessed political nut jobs…..

    ..but blogs dealing with Black progress, especially for the youth to gain credible information about their history, their ancestry and understand that they have and should DEMAND and enforce their human rights across the board, as opposed to being lured into the same old 50 year cycle of entrapment and never getting anywhere because of the go nowhere political system……never tolerate any of that…they matured to such a degree.

    Like

  • Where were you
    When the lights went out
    Sitting on your rocking chair
    Taking no time to think about the babes and sucklings
    There must be a way
    Only truth and rights can justify the day
    Only truth and rights can justify the day

    Here I am taking a stand
    Truth and rights upon this land
    There must be a way
    Only truth and rights can justify the day

    Like

  • The Mastery Key Video Samplers

    Barbados should view it Constitutional process of 2022 as having the old Constitution on an old hard drive that died and none of the data stored can be recovered

    It can rebuild a new Constitution with all the knowledge and wisdom it has learned with information still available in the universe channeling the spirit and presence of God

    Like

  • UpBeat Drum Circles

    Join author and music therapist Christine Stevens in a monthly healing drum circle online. Learn rhythms of the soul, chants, and meet a global community of rhythmical yogis! No prior experience necessary. We all have rhythm!

    Healing Rhythm – Earth’s Heart Beat with Christine Stevens

    Healing Drum Circle Online with Christine Stevens & Soul of Yoga

    Like

  • Building on High Energy
    Expelling Low Energy

    Soul of Yoga
    Soul of Yoga offers spiritual yoga classes. Our classes are unique in that they focus on yoga as a spiritual practice combined with a physical workout to uplift and align your body, mind and spirit.

    Like

  • Read ePaper
    Home / Top Featured Article / Gov’t not observing the ‘structure and form’ of Social Partnership

    Gov’t not observing the ‘structure and form’ of Social Partnership – by Emmanuel Joseph March 25, 2022
    The umbella body for trade unions in Barbados is accusing Government of breaching the established structures and form of the Social Partnership and urges the administration to take stock.

    In a strongly-worded statement issued Thursday, General Secretary of the Congress of Trade Unions and Staff Associations (CTUSAB) Dennis De Peiza said his organisation is concerned that since 2019, there has been a deviation from the
    structure and form of the social partnership which is chaired by Prime Minister Mia Mottley.

    De Peiza said CTUSAB embraces the original concept as promoted by the International Labour Organisation (ILO), which provides for representation from government, labour and the private sector.

    He pointed out that successive protocols provide for the convening of monthly meetings of the sub committee.

    The trade union leader noted that representatives of the Government and an equal number for employers and CTUSAB are to meet for the purpose of consulting and exchanging information that relate to the betterment of the industrial relations climate in Barbados.

    “This apparently seems to have been discarded by the Government of the day. CTUSAB firmly believes that this attempt to alter the long-established form of the partnership must be challenged since it denies the opportunity for the partners to meet and address industrial relations issues,” De Peiza contended.

    He noted that successive protocols also provide for quarterly meetings of the social partnership at which there can be wider discussions on matters that would advance the objectives of the protocols.

    “The congress is steadfast in its belief that the process and procedures for the convening of meetings of the full social partnership under the chairmanship of the Prime Minister, must be observed,” he said.

    He referenced section 12:3 of the Administrative Procedures of Protocol 6, which declares that “after consultation with other social partners, a social partner may invite persons or institutions to participate in a meeting, if that partner deems it desirable to do so in the interest of advancing the objective of this protocol.

    “CTUSAB therefore denounces the non-observance of the provisions of Protocol 6 by Government. Further, the frequent calling of meetings of the full Social Partnership at short notice and sometimes without an agenda, is basically a sign of gross disrespect and disregard for the other social partners,” De Peiza argued.

    “CTUSAB calls on the Government to observe the agreed understandings of Protocol 6, and desist from acting inappropriately,” the spokesman for the trade union umbrella body stated

    Like

  • African Online Publishing Copyright ⓒ 2022. All Rights Reserved

    sum ah dem need viagra fuh deh mine…

    Like

  • Agree, the same social partnership Stuart and the DLP ignored. In defense of MOTTLEY she has had more meetings with the social partnership that the administration you support.

    Around and around we go.

    Like

  • DavidMarch 25, 2022 11:09 AM

    Agree, the same social partnership Stuart and the DLP ignored. In defense of MOTTLEY she has had more meetings with the social partnership that the administration you support.

    Around and around we go
    Xxxxxxxx

    “CTUSAB calls on the Government to observe the agreed understandings of Protocol 6, and desist from acting inappropriately,” the spokesman for the trade union umbrella body stated

    Xxxxx
    David Nowhere in the article is there a comparison between past and present govt in reference to meetings held
    Better yet stick to.the topic at hand
    Better yet hold govt feet to the fire on a promise of accountability and transparency

    Like

  • Read ePaper
    Home / Top Featured Article / DLP’s Walters says measure to control freight costs offers nothing to consumers

    DLP’s Walters says measure to control freight costs offers nothing to consumers – by Marlon Madden March 25, 2022
    The Mia Mottley administration is being urged to scrap the recent cap on freight cost on which duties are to be calculated and put another measure in place that will benefit all importers and ultimately residents.

    This suggestion has come from Ryan Walters, Third Vice President of the Democratic Labour Party (DLP). He said that the recent budgetary measure, which took effect on March 15 and will run for one year, was perhaps nothing but a smokescreen.

    “Who is responsible for designing and ultimately approving this proposal? How does this shield consumers when the threshold only applies to a minority of containers arriving on island? Was this initiative really intended to shield consumers or was it just a smokescreen that allowed government to continue to rake in revenue as freight costs rise?” asked Walters.

    “It is, however, not too late for the Government to make wrong things right. There are options on the table that can bring relief and limit the increases to the cost of living. The threshold of US$7,350 and US$8,000 per 20-ft and 40-ft container respectively, can be lowered to accommodate the reality in the sector,” he said.

    “Additionally, the Government has the option to remove freight costs from the calculation of duties and taxes off imported products, if only as an interim measure. More needs to be done other than talk if the Government is truly interested in shielding the most vulnerable in our society. They need to act now, revise the proposal and bring something that actually helps. Failing to do so at this time will mean that prices will go up and cause further financial pain on Bajans,” warned Walters.

    His objection to the measure comes on the heels of continued calls for Government to explain exactly how the measure would work.

    Chairman of the Barbados Chamber of Commerce and Industry Anthony Branker has expressed concern that the cap will not benefit those who have to pay freight on items coming from CARICOM, North America and Central America, which is said to be the bulk of the imports.

    As such, Branker has cautioned Barbadians about getting overly excited about savings on most commodities.

    Walters expressed disappointment that Government had not gone far enough with the budgetary measure to give ease to residents as it relates to the cost of food.

    “The Government should be ashamed to have advanced an initiative for months that only takes into account a minority of the imports into Barbados. Based on what Mr Branker has reportedly said, how could the government not know that most importers procure their goods from CARICOM, North and Central America and therefore they will not meet the threshold of US$7,350 per 20-foot container and US$8,000 per 40-foot container?” said the DLP spokesman.

    Logistics and supply chain management specialist Gavin Bovell said he too had reservations about the new measure, which was designed to give partial relief to Barbadian consumers.

    In an interview with Barbados TODAY this week, the University of the West Indies, Cave Hill Campus lecturer said while the initiative was a good one, he questioned if Government was prepared to offer further concessions to businesses.

    “While I think the cap is a good initiative, you have to think about companies that have seen increases in freight, but their cost of freight would have traditionally been lower, and I am talking about regional shipments. Are they going to see any special attention paid to them or essentially are they going to see an increase in their duties because they fall below the cap?” he queried.
    marlonmadden@barbadostoday.bb

    Read our ePaper. Fast. Factual. Free.

    Sign up and stay up to date with Barbados’ FREE latest news.

    FacebookTwitterWhatsAppPinterest0Email

    Like

  • Six of one half dozen of another

    Government backbencher issues caution on senior ministers posts – by Sandy Deane March 26, 2022
    Lawmakers on Friday approved provisions for four senior ministerial positions in the Cabinet, but a Government backbencher made it clear she was not “enamoured” by the new posts.

    Although voicing her support for the coordinating roles of the new senior ministers, former Minister for Economic Affairs and Investment Marsha Caddle cautioned the Mia Mottley administration against “throwing people at a problem”.

    Speaking on a resolution to approve the Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries (Remuneration and Allowance Order), 2022 during Friday’s sitting of the House of Assembly, Deputy Prime Minister and Leader of Government Business Santia Bradshaw contended the appointments would significantly strengthen Government’s ability to deliver on its promises.

    Following her Barbados Labour Party’s second consecutive clean sweep in the January 19, 2022 polls, Prime Minister Mia Mottley downsized her Cabinet and announced the appointment of Deputy Prime Minister Santia Bradshaw with coordinating responsibility as a senior minister for Infrastructure; Attorney General Dale Marshall as Senior Minister coordinating for Governance in Cabinet; Minister of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade Senator Dr. The Most Honourable Jerome Walcott as senior minister coordinating for all Social and Environmental Policy and Minister of Energy and Business Development Kerrie Symmonds as senior minister coordinating the Productive Sectors.

    Bradshaw told the House that with the appointments, Government intends to “drill down to where the bottlenecks are within Government and to work collectively and assiduously to ensure we are able to carry out the mandate of this current administration”.

    “We have had to reorganise how the Cabinet works, and certainly senior ministers are now to come to work to address the affairs of the country . . . because there is a recognition there we have to be more clinical in the approach to the affairs of Government and it is therefore not business as usual,” Bradshaw said.

    “To those who believe the [previous] Cabinet was too large . . . we continue to justify that it was necessary at the time because of the magnitude of the work that had to be done. Now we have come again to Government and basically revisited that initial position, but said simply that we need to have another level of ministers along with the deputy prime minister being in a position to be able to hold other ministries to account, to be able to share some of the work with the honourable Prime Minister in being able to execute the mandate of this administration,” she added.

    The Deputy Prime Minister disclosed that the senior ministers have already started meetings on the priorities for each ministry and ministers and public servants are being held accountable for executing the Government’s agenda.

    However, Caddle suggested the administration look beyond individual roles.

    “I think we have to get past the notion that if there is something to fix, you identify that person and you assign a person to fix it,” she said.

    She advised that the real function of coordination must happen at the level of the ministries and departments, while stressing that effective systems must be in place.

    “Are we really measuring the impact on people’s lives? I find myself having to caution us all that simply having an individual, a role, a function that is called senior minister might be a necessary condition but it certainly is not sufficient.

    And we need to be able to move to the place where we have coordinating systems, including data sharing across ministries, including making sure that when we leave meetings work is being done. Because, with all due respect, with the systems of government that we have come to know, a meeting is not a result and a meeting is not a management function because when you leave those meetings, somebody has to go back and do some work that is actually going to make a difference in somebody’s life.

    “I support the areas that have been identified for coordination, so forgive me if I am not enamoured of the senior minister notion. I am more enamoured of the function of coordination that really has to happen at the level of the ministry,” the Member of Parliament for St Michael South Central MP added.

    Under the remuneration and allowances of ministers and parliamentary secretaries outlined in the resolution, the Deputy Prime Minister’s and the Senior Ministers’ annual salary amounts to $181,345.88 annually. Additionally, entertainment allowance is $37,372.56 and travel allowance, $32,586.00.

    Other ministers earn $160,000.10 per year with an entertainment allowance of $24,170.28 and another $23,777.92

    Like

  • “Six of one half dozen of another

    Accessibility Tools

    Increase Text
    Decrease Text
    Grayscale
    High Contrast
    Negative Contrast
    Light Background
    Links Underline
    Readable Font
    Reset
    Read ePaper”

    Scissors symbol and scissors emoji ✂️ ✂ ✁ ✃ ✄ 💇 – Symbolcopy
    Excellent cut and paste job
    and top notch proof reading
    posting propaganda
    social media trolling
    beats your usual spelling “standards”

    Like

  • Some don’t have the courtesy to clean the cut and paste before posting.

    Like

  • I would call the salary of our honourable ministers moderate and reasonable. They work day and night for our Supreme Leader, party and nation.

    In contrast, our government should finally cut civil servants’ salaries because our civil servants sleep too often and are generally too lazy.

    Like

  • The audacity of Independence

    By Garth Patterson

    Our republic recently hit a major pothole on the road to democracy when five independent senators were, according to one section of the press, “slammed” and “blasted” for their stance with respect to the proposals for constitutional amendments that were approved in the House of Assembly a few weeks ago.
    The Mia Mottley-led administration had introduced a measure to amend the constitution to facilitate the appointment of an 18-year-old to the Senate and to remove the constitutionally mandated power of the President to exercise her independent judgment in respect of the appointment of two opposition senators, there being no Leader of the Opposition to advise her on the choice.
    When it became obvious that the Government would not have the necessary support of the independent senators to pass the bill in the Senate, the bill was withdrawn from debate in the Senate, and the Prime Minister subsequently announced that they would not be pursuing their bid to appoint the 18-year-old to the office.
    In doing so, the Prime Minister expressed her disappointment that the independent senators had blocked the measure, suggesting that it signalled that we, as a people, have not yet sufficiently evolved to embrace such a progressive idea of having an eighteen-year-old in the Senate.
    The Prime Minister’s criticisms were echoed by several others, including two prominent political scientists, Dr George Belle and pollster Peter Wickham. The former said the senators’ actions were “a political embarrassment” and “a slap in the face for democracy in Barbados”, while the latter said that the position taken by the independent senators was sad, selfish and unfortunate. According to Dr Belle, it could not be the role of the independent senators to oppose the Government’s will.
    Those views are particularly surprising, especially the ones coming from professionals whose credibility is in large measure dependent on their being perceived as independent, or at least not obviously aligned to any political party. They should know a thing or two about independent thinking and the value of independent thought, and should have been staunch defenders of the right of the independent senators to take an independent view, even if they were not in agreement with those views.
    Our Government frequently boasts that Barbados is a democracy that is wedded to democratic principles and norms, and that that is “who we are”. However, the recent vilification of the independent senators seriously calls that notion into question, as there is nothing more undemocratic than an attack on the free expression of independent views, one’s constitutionally guaranteed right of freedom of expression, and the right of persons to hold views not necessarily aligned with those of the Government.
    Inalienable right
    To oppose a Government is not only one’s inalienable right, but one’s duty, where genuine, conscientious objection is both necessary and appropriate. In the case of the independent senators, they have an even higher calling to independent thought – it is imprinted into their constitutional DNA and it is a derogation of duty for them not to remain unwaveringly independent.
    Section 36(4) of the Constitution provides that the President must, acting in her own discretion, appoint seven senators, and it prescribes the criteria that must inform their selection. They must be persons whom she considers are able “to represent religious, economic or social interests or such other interests as the President considers ought to be represented.”
    Unlike the other senators, nowhere in that section is there the suggestion that the senators should be politically aligned, nor is it a requirement that they should eschew any opposition to the policies of the Government. The senators appointed under this subsection derive their character of independence from being appointed through the exercise of independent judgment by the President, whose office is constitutionally intended to reflect political neutrality.
    The selection of these independent senators is one of the few constitutional
    powers and functions that are reserved to the President where she is not required to act on the advice of, or consult with, some political leader.
    The notion, therefore, that independent senators should be berated for exercising independent thought is anathema to the constitutional role that they are meant to play and to the concept of democracy itself. Dr Belle’s argument that independent senators “should be independent and should not be such that they are likely to oppose a Government’s will” is both contradictory and confusing. More importantly, it misdescribes the important function of the independent senators as the vanguard against unchecked political power.
    Within the constitutional scheme, they are meant to provide balance and independent thought, particularly when it comes to constitutional reform. Indeed, it is only in respect of proposed amendments to deeply entrenched provisions of the Constitution (such as the fundamental rights provisions set out in Chapter III and the provisions relating to the composition and membership of the Parliament and its constituent bodies) that the voices of the independent senators are most poignant and relevant.
    Unlike regular legislation that will pass with a simple majority (Government has 12 of 21 senators and will invariably be able to achieve a simple majority) those reforms require a two-thirds majority of all the members of the Senate. That means that at least 14 senators must approve the measure for the bill to pass. As the Government only has 12 votes, and the opposition will usually oppose, the votes of at least two independent senators are vital to the passage of any such bill. As the Government recently discovered, a truly independent senator should not be taken for granted. His job is to oppose when his conscience and his duty demand it.
    In this age of acute political polarisation, where one’s identity as an individual is defined by the party with whom he or she identifies, it is refreshing and encouraging to see that some flicker of independence is still alive. It used to be that independence was a good thing – these days, however, you run the risk of being a political pariah for not singing from some political hymn sheet.
    If you’re not either a “A”, “B” or “D”, then you are condemned to national irrelevance or a form of social and economic purgatory. I know a little bit about that, having never aligned myself with, or supported, any political party and having in recent times the audacity to express views that are not quite congruent with those of the political establishment.
    I have been vilified for criticising the Government (and wrongly branded as being anti-Mia) while at the same time being accused of being a sycophant of the ruling BLP government because I had some very complimentary things to say about our Prime Minister. Go figure.
    If that is the price of being an independent thinker, then I will happily pay it. And I enthusiastically applaud the independent five for their courage and tenacity in pushing back when their consciences and duty required it. We need, now more than ever, a whole lot more of that.
    Garth Patterson is a senior counsel.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Missed opportunity in Senate, say youth activists
    By Colville Mounsey
    colvillemounsey@nationnews.com
    The decision by Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley to hold fast on constitutional amendments which would have lowered the age participation in the Senate or the Lower House from 21 to 18, has triggered a national debate about where the country stands on youth inclusion in the decisionmaking process.
    In making the announcement, Mottley explained that her hand was forced as it was clear that the amendment was not going to garner the support of the Independent senators.
    “It is unfortunate that in the midst of global turmoil with respect to youth in crisis, Barbados finds itself at a point where embracing young people and youthful leadership is clearly still beyond its imagination,” Mottley lamented after meeting with teenager Khaleel Kothdiwala, who was on track to be the youngest senator ever appointed, pending the change in legislation.
    Critics
    A lot of blame has been apportioned all around, with some chastising the Independent senators for their stance, while others like former Opposition Leader Bishop Joseph Atherley, argued that Mottley erred in naming the person designated to fill the post before the change was made.
    Independent Senator Crystal Drakes contended that amending the Constitution to lower the age for people to be elected to the House could be exposing them to matters they might not be mature enough to handle. She said there were things in the political realm for which intellect alone could not prepare a person at such an impressionable age.
    “I am in no way standing here saying that an 18-yearold should not be in the Senate, that has my full support. I, however, have my reservation about an 18-yearold being able to sit as an elected member of the House of Assembly,” Drakes added.
    Chance gone?
    The question now remains as to whether this turn of events will go down in history as a missed opportunity for a society that often complains of its youth operating on the fringes of the mainstream, to provide a tangible example of their input being valued in the decision-making process.
    Youth activist Alex Downes said he certainly believes that it was a missed opportunity, noting it was a chance to go beyond the tokenism that has been afforded young people over the years. Downes queried why some people believe 18 years was a mature enough age to grasp the issues of the day to make an informed decision at the polls, yet too green to help with the formulation of the very policies they are asked to deliberate on.
    “Often times youth are not involved where they can make a difference. You are usually relegated to a youth forum. While these are great places for you to spread your wings and develop, it is not a place where they can affect change in society. So when I heard that Khaleel Kothdiwala was chosen for this role, I immediately thought that this was a perfect opportunity for an intelligent young man with a solid grasp of the issues to be able to contribute to the discussion at that level,” said Downes.
    The youth activist argued that not every 18-year-old would possess the aptitude to serve in the Senate,
    but noted that the door must be left open for those who possess the capability and the desire to serve at that capacity.
    “Not every 18-year-old is going to be capable of participating in Parliament or the Senate. Not every 18-yearold is going to have an interest in that, but there are some who are able and willing and should be afforded the opportunity to do such. It is obviously not going to happen at this point and I think it is extremely disappointing because it would have been good to finally see a young person not only placed in a position where they can grow and learn, but where they can actively participate in what is happening in the country,” he added.
    These sentiments were shared by fellow youth activist Firhaana Bulbulia, who said that the “nomination signalled that there is a growing recognition of the valuable contribution young people are making as partners and leaders in the development of Barbados.”
    Disappointing
    She said: “We must strive to remove the barriers that hinder the ability of all Barbadians to hold positions of influence. The outcome is disappointing particularly for young people who were following closely and shared in the excitement of what felt like a brother being represented within the Senate, and who would have undoubtedly represented an even younger demographic on critical issues of importance to youth.”
    “Although disappointing, I do believe this is still a momentous occasion, because what it has done is sparked conversation around the role, abilities and passion of youth to drive change forward. It has opened a door that was not there before,” she added.

    Source: Nation

    Like

  • Vincent Codrington

    O how we like to create straw men that we can lick down and cry victory.!! Is there a particular problem of youth that needs a youth under 21 years of age to voice? How young is youth.? Must this voice be in the Legislative Chambers in order to be heard? What is the upper age limit of youth?

    Like

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ david BU
    When one does not know where one wants to go any road will do. When one does not know where one is, it is difficult to make progress. One can go around in circles. As a nation lets hope we are not going around in circles.I think Theoretical Physics says something similar to this about speed and position/ location. The problem is multiplied in human sciences.

    Like

  • @ Vincent

    Would you agree it is the prerogative of the PM to select who she wants to the Senate to represent whatever interest she want to pursue?

    Like

  • @Vincent

    The blogmaster has come to a realization a long time ago tackling soft issues in ‘absolute’ is not smart.

    Like

  • Magnificent a.k.a Magno – Yu Heard Formula: C₂₁H₃₀O₂ IUPAC ID: (−)-(6aR,10aR)-6,6,9-trimethyl- 3-pentyl-6a,7,8,10a-tetrahydro- 6H-benzo[c]chromen-1-ol

    Your Grandparents

    “O how we like to create straw men that we can lick down and cry victory.!! Is there a particular problem of youth that needs a youth under 21 years of age to voice?”

    yes
    youth have energy and passion for life
    you had when 18 (50+ years ago)
    old people are deaf dumb blind
    backward by at least 50-60 years

    read the title about bajan politics
    dlp woke up dead this morning

    Like

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ David BU
    Yes. Provided they sit within the four corners of the Law and the Constitution of Barbados. There are also conventions and practices to which we should all pay attention. The bottom line is to do no harm .
    A good leader is sensitive to the expectations of those he/she leads. So far I have noticed a responsiveness to the concerns of the citizenry. This is a shift in paradigm with which I am please. It could be the legacy you are searching for.
    Terms like “prerogative” do not appear in the constitutions of Democracies. So I am a bit surprised at your use of the term.

    Like

  • @Vincent

    What about discretion?

    Like

  • grouptherapy. – ‘raise it up!’

    Like

  • Too Risky Too Risky Too Risky Too Risky Too Risky Too Risky Too Risky Too Risky Too Risky

    Like

  • Youth have got more pride nowadays,
    in the good old days people had to eat shit and smile

    Like

  • DLP: Whither Senate offer from Government?
    THE DEMOCRATIC LABOUR PARTY (DLP) wants to know if postponement of the constitutional amendment just over a week ago means that the legal framework for the offer of two Opposition Senate seats has been abandoned.
    On March 18, Leader of Government Business, Senator Lisa Cummins, moved to adjourn debate in the Senate on the Constitution (Amendment) Bill, 2022, which sought to change the age for a person to be admitted to the Senate or House of Assembly from 21 to 18, as well as make provision for the party with the second highest votes in a General Election to have two Senate seats where there was no Opposition Leader.
    Cummins did so after it became evident the bill would not receive the required two-thirds majority vote.
    30-0 defeat
    The DLP, which suffered a 30-0 defeat at the polls on January 19, said it had repeatedly stated its intention to accept the Senate positions once the legislation was in place for a Prime Minister
    to make an offer.
    “Postponement for further consideration usually signals the shelving of legislation for the current parliamentary term, as was the case with the Integrity in Public Life Bill. We have waited for word of revision,” the party said in a press release.
    “We would hope that the Government would seek to redraft the document to reflect the omission of the contentious clauses, revisit the debate on the provision for an Opposition, and find time and space for a full parliamentary debate on constitutional reform,” it added. (BA/PR)

    Source: Nation

    Like

  • “THE DEMOCRATIC LABOUR PARTY (DLP) wants to know if postponement of the constitutional amendment just over a week ago means that the legal framework for the offer of two Opposition Senate seats has been abandoned.”

    Obviously that is an affirmatory which means negatory as they abandoned the without prejudice offer (legal term) by preferiing to be emotional drama queens and took the GoB to Court over the matter to determine in the PM was breaking Constitutional Law and the Judge ruled Hell No

    Anyway back to the youth promotion
    Check out the progress of Jadagrace
    from arts collective grouptherapy.
    the dot is part of the name spelling

    Bounce

    ‘Express Yourself’

    Like

  • Does Barbados have a Minister of foreign Affairs
    Haven’t seen or heard of such individual since Govt maintained power
    What I have seen is the PM running from pillar to post undertaking engagements in foreign countries which ought to be assigned to the Minister of Foreign affairs
    How many Hats does the PM wants to wear including that of the President

    Like

  • Board must explain
    WITH GOVERNMENT’S 2022-2023 financial year starting on Friday, the amount of public funding provided to state-owned enterprises (SOEs) remains a concern.
    Fixing SOEs was one of the key planks of the Barbados Economic Recovery and Transformation programme. SOE reform started before the pandemic crippled the economy and Government’s finances, but the crisis was a setback for these efforts.
    With Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley signalling that her administration will be hastily recommencing the SOE reform agenda, the Transport Board is one entity of concern. Last Friday, the House of Assembly approved a $45.5 million supplementary, which included $3 million to cover the salaries and other operating expenditure of the Transport Board.
    Urgent
    Recently, in making a call for Government to do more to enhance revenue and reduce costs at SOEs, Barbados Private Sector Association chairman Trisha Tannis told the Barbados Chamber of Commerce & Industry’s post-Budget breakfast forum that $13 million was over-transferred to the Transport Board during this current financial year. Tannis said this showed there was a need to get a lot more serious and urgent about plugging what she called fiscal gaps.
    The Transport Board’s financial woes are not new, as this entity has been propped up financially by successive Governments. However, the company should be in a better financial position for several reasons. One is the fact that bus fares have increased; the other is that it now has a more efficient fleet following the purchase of electric buses.
    It is true that the pandemic was not kind to the Transport Board. With many Barbadians
    forced to work remotely in 2020 and afterwards, and with schools having to resort to online teaching, the board’s ridership declined. This was compounded by the fact that in line with the COVID-19 health protocols, public service vehicles could not operate at full capacity.
    However, speaking during the recent Estimates Debate, Transport Board chief executive officer Fabian Wharton reported that the acquiring of 49 electric buses for $45 million in 2020 resulted in a significant reduction in money spent on business maintenance and fuel.
    Bus maintenance costs decreased from $15 million at the end of 2019 to $6 million at the end of 2021, he said.
    Electric buses
    Wharton said that at the end of the 2020 financial year the Transport Board’s diesel bill was $8.2 million and that up to the end of February this year it declined to $4.9 million. These are significant savings which provide evidence that outside of the environmental benefits, the transition to electric buses has provided a major financial benefit to the Transport Board.
    It is worrisome that despite the reduced operational costs outlined by Wharton, this SOE still needs an additional $3 million to pay its workers and meet other expenses. More information must be provided on why so much money is still being pumped into the Transport Board, given the evidence that the gap between its revenue and expenditure should have narrowed. This is even while accounting for the pandemic-related issues.
    The taxpayers deserve to know.
    It is worrisome that despite the reduced operational costs . . . this SOE still needs an additional $3 million to pay its workers and meet other expenses


    Source: Nation

    Like

  • Oh Wharton bus fare increased which also added to revenue
    As the old people say yuh could buy land but yuh can’t hide and work it
    Which begs the question where did all the accumulation of the millions in savings go

    Like

  • The audacity of Independence
    by Garth Patterson

    Our republic recently hit a major pothole on the road to democracy when five independent senators were, according to one section of the press, “slammed” and “blasted” for their stance with respect to the proposals for constitutional amendments that were approved in the House of Assembly a few weeks ago.
    The Mia Mottley-led administration had introduced a measure to amend the constitution to facilitate the appointment of an 18-year-old to the Senate and to remove the constitutionally mandated power of the President to exercise her independent judgment in respect of the appointment of two opposition senators, there being no Leader of the Opposition to advise her on the choice.
    When it became obvious that the Government would not have the necessary support of the independent senators to pass the bill in the Senate, the bill was withdrawn from debate in the Senate, and the Prime Minister subsequently announced that they would not be pursuing their bid to appoint the 18-year-old to the office.
    In doing so, the Prime Minister expressed her disappointment that the independent senators had blocked the measure, suggesting that it signaled that we, as a people, have not yet sufficiently evolved to embrace such a progressive idea of having an 18-year-old in the Senate.
    The Prime Minister’s criticisms were echoed by several others, including two prominent political scientists, Dr. George Belle and pollster Peter Wickham. The former said the senators’ actions were “a political embarrassment” and “a slap in the face for democracy in Barbados”, while the latter said that the position taken by the independent senators was sad, selfish and unfortunate.
    According to Dr. Belle, it could not be the role of the independent senators to oppose the Government’s will.
    Those views are particularly surprising, especially the ones coming from professionals whose credibility is in large measure dependent on their being perceived as independent, or at least not obviously aligned to any political party. They should know a thing or two about independent thinking and the value of independent thought, and should have been staunch defenders of the right of the independent senators to take an independent view, even if they were not in agreement with those views.
    Our Government frequently boasts that Barbados is a democracy that is wedded to democratic principles and norms, and that that is “who we are”.
    However, the recent vilification of the independent senators seriously calls that notion into question, as there is nothing more undemocratic than an attack on the free expression of independent views, one’s constitutionally guaranteed right of freedom of expression, and the right of persons to hold views not necessarily aligned with those of the Government.
    To oppose a Government is not only one’s inalienable right, but one’s duty, where genuine, conscientious objection is both necessary and appropriate.
    In the case of the independent senators, they have an even higher calling to independent thought – it is imprinted into their constitutional DNA and it is a derogation of duty for them not to remain unwaveringly independent.
    Section 36(4) of the Constitution provides that the President must, acting in her own discretion, appoint seven senators, and it prescribes the criteria that must inform their selection. They must be persons whom she considers are able “to represent religious, economic or social interests or such other interests as the President considers ought to be represented.” Unlike the other senators, nowhere in that section is there the suggestion that the senators should be politically aligned, nor is it a requirement that they should eschew any opposition to the policies of the Government.
    The senators appointed under this subsection derive their character of independence from being appointed through the exercise of independent judgment by the President, whose office is constitutionally intended to reflect political neutrality.
    The selection of these independent senators is one of the few constitutional powers and functions that is reserved to the President where she is not required to act on the advice of, or consult with, some political leader.
    The notion, therefore, that independent senators should be berated for exercising independent thought is anathema to the constitutional role that they are meant to play and to the concept of democracy itself.
    Dr. Belle’s argument that independent senators “should be independent and should not be such that they are likely to oppose a Government’s will” is both contradictory and confusing.
    More importantly, it misdescribes the important function of the independent senators as the vanguard against unchecked political power.
    Within the constitutional scheme, they are meant to provide balance and independent thought, particularly when it comes to constitutional reform.
    Indeed, it is only in respect of proposed amendments to deeply entrenched provisions of the Constitution (such as the fundamental rights provisions set out in Chapter III and the provisions relating to the composition and membership of the Parliament and its constituent bodies) that the voices of the independent senators are most poignant and relevant.
    Unlike regular legislation that will pass with a simple majority (Government has 12 of 21 senators and will invariably be able to achieve a simple majority) those reforms require a two-thirds majority of all the members of the Senate. That means that at least 14 senators must approve the measure for the bill to pass.
    As the Government only has 12 votes, and the opposition will usually oppose, the votes of at least two independent senators are vital to the passage of any such bill. As the Government recently discovered, a truly independent senator should not be taken for granted. His job is to oppose when his conscience and his duty demand it.
    In this age of acute political polarisation, where one’s identity as an individual is defined by the party with whom he or she identifies, it is refreshing and encouraging to see that some flicker of independence is still alive. It used to be that independence was a good thing – these days, however, you run the risk of being a political pariah for not singing from some political hymn sheet.
    If you’re not either a “A”, “B” or “D” then you are condemned to national irrelevance or a form of social and economic purgatory. I know a little bit about that, having never aligned myself with, or supported, any political party and having in recent times the audacity to express views that are not quite congruent with those of the political establishment.
    I have been vilified for criticising the Government (and wrongly branded as being anti-Mia) while at the same time being accused of being a sycophant of the ruling BLP government because I had some very complimentary things to say about our Prime Minister. Go figure.
    If that is the price of being an independent thinker, then I will happily pay it. And I enthusiastically applaud the independent five for their courage and tenacity in pushing back when their consciences and duty required it. We need, now more than ever, a whole lot more of that.
    Garth Patterson Q.C. is a Senior Partner of Lex Caribbean. He was called to the Bars of Jamaica and Barbados in 1987 and the Bars of New York and St Lucia in 1990 and 2011 respectively.

    Like

  • @ David

    I’m sure you’ll agree that an increase in bus fare does not necessarily means Transport Board would realize an increase in revenue, especially under the circumstances where, despite the purchase of 49 new electric buses and additional buses through the Transport Augmentation Programme (TAP) programme, TB DOES NOT have ENOUGH buses to adequately service ALL routes.

    Several of the older units have been decommissioned, scrapped and auctioned, especially those units that were purchased in 1997, 2000 and 2014, while the few remaining from those fleets are either being refurbished or undergoing extensive repairs, for example, at L&N, (which is now located at Trans-Tech’s compound), and Simpsons Motors.

    Additionally, every financial year TB applies to the Finance Ministry for supplementary financing to further finance its operations.
    This obviously meant the Board has never been in a position to address many of its operational inefficiencies.

    But, remember, the Auditor General’s ‘Special Audit of the Transport Board’ revealed several financial infelicities.

    Bearing that in mind, the decrease in bus maintenance costs from $15M in 2019 to $6M at the end of 2021, Wharton referred to, for example, is simply a savings of $9M to the Treasury ….. and not TB.

    For anyone to ask “where did all the accumulation of the millions in savings go,” not only demonstrates a ‘monstrous perversion of logic and common sense ‘ but is a clear indication that the individual does not understand basic bookkeeping and is only ‘criticising just for the sake of being critical.’

    Like

  • @Artax

    Did the PAC investigation under Atherley of the TB die with the dissolution of parliament?

    Like

  • Revealed In Parliament

    The Deputy Prime Minister and each of 3 Senior Ministers are getting these annually:

    Salary $181,345.88
    Entertainment Allowance
    $37,372.56
    Traveling Allowance $32,586.00
    Total annually $251,304.44

    The other 18 Ministers, will each get these annually:

    Salary $160,000.10
    Entertainment Allowance
    $24,170.28
    Traveling Allowance $23,777.92
    Total annually $207,948.30

    N.B. We haven’t seen the figures for the Head-Honcho.

    BTW, former Minister Marsha Caddle had some ‘things to say about the position of Senior Minister – food for thought! Some people who work so hard can’t see that in 10 years.

    Like

  • @ David

    It seems as though the PAC ‘died a sudden death’ even before Parliament was dissolved.

    Since then, I’ve been hearing a rumour that Lynda Holder has been suspended, which I have so far been unable to verify whether or not it’s true.

    But, kudos must be given to Atherley for the role he played in revitalizing the PAC.

    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 )

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