This evening was the turn of the Leader of the Opposition Mia Mottley to respond to the budget. Like Prime Minister David Thompson, she is a bright young Barbadian who have committed to render to public service. Barbadians will desperately hope that under the leadership of these two young Barbadians our country will be able to steer a path to calm waters. We made the point in our previous blog, and it is worth repeating that the global economic turbulence will surely test our resilience as a people.
We were able to listen to much of what the Opposition Leader had to say this evening. No Barbadian will ever say that that she is not comfortable on the public stage. Here debating antics were as to be expected and we score her a ten. While we have a passing interest in some of her rebuttals, we will wait to hear the government side before we fully critique the budget presentation. However it seems that she has pinned the bulk of her argument on the decision that the government should fore go excise tax to buffer the shock of rising oil prices.
Many who have visited the BU and BFP in recent months would have surmised that the current state of the global economy, and the uncertainty of oil pricing have led to an unprecedented current state of affairs. In such a situation old modalities will not work. The challenge to sustain our nation will call for an awakening of every Barbadian to the fact that our current consumption behaviour which we have come to enjoy must of necessity change. Barbados for all it has achieved has failed to use our revered intellect to build out capacity in the economy to stop our reliance on tourism. We have also failed to enable the environment to build a strategy to achieve food security. Last but not least we have failed to enable the environment to grow alternate energy sources.
It is the view of the BU household that over the next two or three years, a bi-partisan approach maybe required to leverage against the knowledge and experience which is posited in the former government. If we accept that government is a continuum, then our country maybe disadvantaged by operating in the traditional partisan mode. So far in her reply Opposition Leader Mia Mottley has prosecuted with flair. But we feel in our gut that at this juncture in our history we need to hear a little more. The survival of our beautiful country depends on valued contributions from all members of our parliament.
So off we go to listen to the rest of the debate.












136 responses so far ↓
Adrian Hinds // July 8, 2008 at 7:58 pm
The DLP dilly-dally with the homosexual, and immigration debate, when they should have embrace the people’s views. Now they have done the same with ITAL and MIA has brilliantly one-up them on it. Do not doubt the this woman’s ability to work real hard to become the PM of Barbados. When yuh relax she will bite, and bite she did with her declaration of assets and the invitation for Thompy to FOLLOW. What choice does he have now?
David // July 8, 2008 at 8:14 pm
We think another point which can be made is the fact that the DLP has only been in position for 6 months. They have entered government at a very difficult time and has had to devise strategy and implement while hitting the ground running.
John // July 8, 2008 at 8:46 pm
Didn’t see all of her presentation but what I saw from Mia was good.
Her $2000 lock got trumped by the $17,000 ackee tree (Chris Sinkler) but the point she made stood …. walk the walk.
All the talk about ITAL when caught out with the crap she exposed is impossible to trump!!
David Thompson, listen to your Mum and do what you said you would!!
anotherview // July 8, 2008 at 8:50 pm
Wait to hear a rebuttal before you jump on this lock business Johnno.
What about when Chris kept saying she instead of honourable member. Then in all sincerity he say ’sorry, she is a mistake’-wuhloss, dat wus hilarious!!!!
Chris Halsall // July 8, 2008 at 8:57 pm
I almost fell off my chair…
At the end of the CBC summation of the broadcast, the announcer left the audience with a teaser — something along the lines of “And coming up, meet Barbados’ newest millionaire…” (Probably by way of a lottery — almost by definition a tax on those who are bad at math…)
Then there was an ad by a local distributor, talking about how easy it was to consume… (Credit terms available….)
I stopped watching at that point… Sigh… How very, *very* far we have to go….
Namaste all.
(P.S. Will the CBC broadcasts on this matter be available to the public for future reference?)
UWI Student // July 8, 2008 at 8:58 pm
I thought Mia Mottley’s speech was excellent. I normally don’t watch the budget, but I felt compelled to listen to it today.
Redds // July 8, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Who is the woman that worked alongside John Compton that is now being paid $200,000.00 to consult on these constituency councils, she also made mention of another female whose cousin works in the PM that is being paid big sums. Why do I get the feeling that Darcy Boyce is actually the PM of Barbados or that freepress was right in stating that he actually runs bim. He seems to have his hands in everything no wonder he was on VOB defending the budget last night because he was the one that drafted it and therefore had to defend his policies(brainchild). It it also funny that Mia stated Darcy was behind some of the biggest projects for the past ten years,the highway expansion, BTI, Kensington and Paragon, so if these were such failures why is he currently running the PM head, no pun intended?
Adrian Hinds // July 8, 2008 at 9:15 pm
UWI Student // July 8, 2008 at 8:58 pm
I thought Mia Mottley’s speech was excellent. I normally don’t watch the budget, but I felt compelled to listen to it today.
================================
What points made in the speech to your mind makes it excellent?
Anonymous // July 8, 2008 at 9:32 pm
The Blp hacks and those who are easily bamboozled by grandstanding are here talking about how impressed they are with mottley.
Well to my mind – mia was as her name suggests – missing (m) in (i) action (a).
She was so awful,so empty,rambling all along and not even dealing with the budgetary proposals in any substantive way.
Of course at the end like owen – the name calling of members of the public who are not there to respond.
Imagine Mia of all persons talking about corruption – well that is like the devil criticising sinners.What a laugh.
She was a poor counter to david thompson’s budget.
While he dealt with substance – she was all words,and inneundos,and personal attack – so juvenille you would have thought she was doing a six form queens college debate.
Pathetic,pathetic,pathetic.
Somehow I get the impression that david has a soft spot for Mia – hence his 10 points.
I respectfully disagree however.
Tell me Why // July 8, 2008 at 9:44 pm
Anonymous et al. First, let us put our partisan politics aside and deal with the substance of the lady. What we saw is a rebuttal by the leader of the opposition on statements made by the PM. That is her fundamental right. She mentioned certain questionable dealing by the Rural Development which she submitted proof and made them documents of the House. We have to stamp out corruption…..we have to stamp out wastage……we have to stamp out poor decision by the people who should know better. This is the only way we can advanced ourselves to prudent management.
Ras Bash // July 8, 2008 at 9:44 pm
I think that one must listen very carefully to the PM’s budgetary proposal what does it do for poor people, nothing. Where is the relief that was promised….no cents in d change…
Adrian Hinds // July 8, 2008 at 9:56 pm
Tell me Why // July 8, 2008 at 9:44 pm
Anonymous et al. First, let us put our partisan politics aside and deal with the substance of the lady. What we saw is a rebuttal by the leader of the opposition on statements made by the PM. That is her fundamental right. She mentioned certain questionable dealing by the Rural Development which she submitted proof and made them documents of the House. We have to stamp out corruption…..we have to stamp out wastage……we have to stamp out poor decision by the people who should know better. This is the only way we can advanced ourselves to prudent management.
=================================
All Mia has done by way of reading and laying those documents in the house, is to solidify the need to continue our national pastime of letting the axe fall on the hacks, and euthanizing those yard-fowls that refuse to expire at the end of their natural 5 yr life cycle.
Carson C. Cadogan // July 8, 2008 at 9:56 pm
The Devil correcting sin. The BLP really think that people are idiots.
Of all the people in the world talking about mis- deeds, the leader of the BLP.
This is the same BLP that sickened Bajans with their stealing and wrong doing. Ministers becoming millionaires on Minister salaries. Building a house on stolen land, Mercedes Benz as kick backs, changing zone one to zone two in order to get millions of dollars in their pockets. The sad thing about it is the fact that no one in the BLP gave a damn.
The BLP has no shame at all! Mr Mottley really needs something to do.
Knot // July 8, 2008 at 10:11 pm
I’m sure that some members of the present government will too become millionaires, so have no fear… what we should be concerned about is the fact that our working poor must bear the burden of this economy, that housing, food and necessary services are barely within or just outside our reach and that the budget will not give any more spending power to any Barbadan I know. Missing from the budget was a real way to survive in these times without placing ourselves in undue debt. i think the response of ms mottley was reasonable and beats that of the former shadow minister of finance who never spoke to the measures implemented
David // July 8, 2008 at 10:18 pm
We should correct former Minister of Public Works Gline Clarke when he stated that there was a tendering process. He was half truthful. There was a tendering process for the road widenning part of the project NOT the for the flyovers.
We find it ludicrous that he would spend the last 5 minutes of his contribution to the debate on the ABC Highway project. Wasn’t he the Minister who presided over the project? Would he not want to clarify this matter given the decision by the government to terminate the project?
Makes us go ummmmmmmmmmm!
Sundowner // July 8, 2008 at 10:25 pm
Mia annoyed me so much with her Hitler tirade I put her on mute. Her PR advisor has been working hard, clothes, hairstyle, my husband want to know if they’re trying to turn her into a woman! – sorry, his comment not mine -
I thought Sealys reply to Mia was excellent, poured myself the last of the cheap rum and enjoyed…………..
UWI Student // July 8, 2008 at 10:31 pm
As i have learnt during my tenure at UWI, and outlined by Mia in her rebuttal, debt-financing is not all bad, actually it can be cheaper to finance stuff by debt, as you pass on your risk to another entity. One must make sure though, that this debt-financing is used in a developing sector, and not for consumption. As the sector develops, for instance manufacturing, government would be able to service the debt. Question is, how much debt can barbados afford? Are these figures from the central bank (underestimation of Barbadian Economy), quoted by Mia Mottely, true? The previous BLP government wasted money, and crying foul over spoilt milk isn’t going to change the past. The DLP government mentioned the clay industry/furniture and sea island cotton. I don’t see these making a huge contribution, but, let’s see what happens. Any suggestions to diversify our economy away from solely tourism, i encouage. I hope David Thompson incorporates some of what Mia Mottely says into his plans, instead of playing the party-bashing politics game. Our economy is too susceptable at this point in time to think of our own political objetives. Was any mention made of CSME?
David // July 8, 2008 at 10:35 pm
@UWI Student
We hope that you would have been thought that having passed the acid test to determine the debt burden to carry there must be a strategy to determine how the debt will be serviced over time. Remember the foreign debt must be serviced with foreign exchange.
Bush tea // July 8, 2008 at 10:37 pm
I have some admiration for Mia.
…anyone with the pure gall (or balls) to stand before the nation and speak as she did – knowing full well that 99% of us could think of nothing much beyond her now famous biting experience- must be brave indeed….. but
What reply what!?!
How do you criticize a presentation like the Prime Minister’s yesterday when just in January, you left legacies like Greenland, 3S, The oil terminal, the prison fiasco, the total immigration mess, etc etc etc?
…I have to concur with the assessment of Anonymous – she sounded like a schoolgirl in a lower sixth debate where her main aim was to ‘talk for the time ‘
I also agree that her point about the $2000 lock, if true, is valuable. It should provide the PM with an excellent opportunity to clean house NOW, thereby reinforcing his genuine commitment to honesty and good governance.
I would have NO problem with these politicians calling names and reading such details in public, as I strongly believe that this will help to keep other potential crooks on their P’s and Q’s.
This is one of the roles that my National Supervisory Committee would play….
Bajantease // July 8, 2008 at 10:37 pm
I found the lock interesting, and she proved a point.. DLP doing the same thing the BLP are accused of doing.. the rebuttle of what about the cost of cutting down a tree :) heh cutting down a tree is a much more complex and dangerous affair than installing a lock; but seriously rather than jumping saying what gives her the right to speak .. should we not be insisting that we just kicked out the Bees for the same thing and we are NOT going to allow the Dees to NOW do the same. The CBC thing was another, surely that is a conflict to have a new board and immediately change insurers to the company owned by the chairman?
Treat All the same, isn’t that what we as a people voted for and should now be fighting for.
David // July 8, 2008 at 10:41 pm
@BT
Nothing is stopping Mia or anyone in parliament from calling names. As the Prime Minister pointed out the rules of the house ask that the names be submitted to the Speaker first.
Is it that Mia did not remember the rule in her haste to rush the names to the public?
Chris Halsall // July 8, 2008 at 10:57 pm
For the record…
The broadcast from the House continued from our great CBC…
The House has *just* now adjourned until 0900 tomorrow (Barbados time)… (The CBC broadcast immediately cut into a BB Lotteries draw… Sigh….)
Again, I (personally) hope that all this greatness is being recorded, and will be available to all for all time….
And, while I bother to share… A great deal of the broadcast involved individuals mentioning and commenting upon “the record”. Could anyone bother to share with me (personally) just what “the record” means to anyone here in our beautiful Barbados?
Please forgive me — I am an ignorant fool — a stranger in a strange land….
Bush tea // July 8, 2008 at 10:59 pm
Bajantease,
It is NOT the same thing.
Almost ALL Bajans are thieves. We take things that we should not, charge more than we know we should, take short cuts, try to ‘help out’ out family and friends first etc etc.
The problem with the BLP is that this dishonesty became INSTITUTIONALIZED. So that it was almost official policy. (every thing was covered up, cases disappeared, cases were forgotten (whatever happened to the FBI investigation that the then PM spoke about?) etc.)
Therefore, if a functionary in the new DLP administration starts down that road, (only one?) that is to be FULLY expected.
The real question is “WHAT WILL BE THE RESPONSE OF THE PARTY LEADERS”
This is what will be the defining factor.
David,
Name calling by politicians (especially LAWYERS like Mia and the PM) is dangerous because they will tend to use it for personal political ends.
My NSC will be focused on ITAL.
How much you willing to bet that the lock story will have a very logical explanation related to expediting a reasonable job to facilitate work for some worthy citizen?
David // July 8, 2008 at 11:02 pm
@Chris Halsall
The proceedings in parliament is being recorded by CBC but it is our understanding that the recordings is the property of the state and cannot be sold to the public.
Chris Halsall // July 8, 2008 at 11:16 pm
@(BU)David…
Thank you for your above…
However, is not the CBC owned by the Government of Barbados. Ergo: owned by the people of Barbados.
Ergo, is not everything recorded by, and produced by, the CBC, the property of the people?
IHMO… Kindest regards to all… Etc, etc, etc….
Georgie Porgie // July 8, 2008 at 11:23 pm
David
I thought for the record meant that it was recorded in Hansard.
Chris Halsall // July 8, 2008 at 11:25 pm
@(BU)David…
And to drill down a bit further on my above…
Surly an independent, sovereign, democratic and thoughtful state would have a formal record of what was said and tabled in their most honourable Parliament.
Such a record would be quite independent of any estate; this would be their own concern — ensuring the stated were recorded; agreed upon, distributed and reproducible… (I believe this is commonly referred to as The Gazette.)
So, I again ask: how does (any)one gain access to the record….
Wishing In Vain // July 8, 2008 at 11:47 pm
Not sure if any of you suffered thru to see the beast mottley labour thru her presentation this evening in the House Of Assembly but for me this was a classic case of having nothing to offer and to bluff her way for the duration of her speech, she would have been better served instead of trying to labour for four hours to compact her speech into an hour and call it quits, actually much of what she said lacked any substance anyway and it maybe could have compacted into ten minutes but I will be kind to her and suggest an hour.
It was empty, shallow and boring, Mottley had two choices to make today one was to take the high ground and still stay above the nasty politics and nasty snide comments or to get political and get down dirty and deep, I honestly felt that she had no defined plan and as a result she was scattered all over the place and then finally got to the point that she lives in the gutter.
She of all people should be wary of where she attempted to go this evening, she would have been better served by staying in the clean and clear and maybe the listening audience would have respected her much more and would have been understanding of her position when it could be said she was trying her best against a six month old Gov’t that has done little if anything wrong since they came to office.
Noiw based purely on the comparsion of the reception for the two leaders yesterday’s was by far a massive show of support whereas today was nothing in the courtyard of the Parliament.
She has yet to learn the importantce of timing and opportunity this maybe why Dale Marshall has her measured and is simply biding his time on the rails to lurk thru with a strong finishing bust to the election leaders finishing post ahead of Mottley.
Chris delivered a most telling series of punches that in five minutes of his speech he have destroyed her four mispent hours of presentation, his most telling response to her other than his comment about being scared for her because of certain of her skills was the one in which he nearly threw the receipt book at her for rents collected by JOE ATHERLEY’S wife for homes built by URBAN and for which she has been collecting rents not on URBAN’S behalf but on her own behalf, added to this was his comment that URBAN built nearly 500 homes most of which they have no records for, really a sad and an amazing revelation of gross fraud once again by Mottley / Arthur combination of crooks in action.
boredickey // July 9, 2008 at 12:05 am
Whats with this long straight hair look all of a sudden and her taking her left hand to brush the hair back. Is Mia trying to create a feminine look of cuteness. I think if she wants to carve a trademark, Mia should try scratching the top of her head more frequently. Chris Sinckler really tore into her….poor soul.
UWI Student // July 9, 2008 at 12:10 am
What happens if these taxes backfire and slows down economic growth? People will have less dispoable income, causing a multiplier effect in the economy, which can lead to increased level in inflation.
The estimated income generated can also fall way short with delinquency in payment of taxes. How is this $4 per month tax on cellphones going to be implemented? Doesn’t the additional cost incurred in tax collection going to severely affect the domestic revenue collected by government? But that’s only domestive revenue.
And still….. what about CSME? what considerations were made in our budget to faciliate our gradual movement into a regional union?
I think free transportation for school children is a good idead. It will save me $6 a day! Increase tax on tobacco is okay as well. My only issue with the last statement is that making cigarettes more expensive can cause addicts to seek more severe methods, like theft, to support their addiction and increasing the price of cigarettes makes marijuana appear relatively cheaper.
Wishing In Vain // July 9, 2008 at 12:15 am
boredickey NO poor soul for her not at all.
I am told that by this time in her quest not to be viewed as a lesbian shw will announce a wedding date and by this time next year she will be pregnant ( that is a scary thought mottley bearing a child)
Any scam if it gets her three more votes.
John // July 9, 2008 at 12:23 am
… Mia talked for four hours?
I just saw the bit from just before the lock to the end.
I found it quite entertaining.
If after four hours she could come up with that and not look even the slightest bit tired I figure she must have real stamina.
At budget time I usually subscribe to the view that when our politicians finish what ever it is they have to say they will shut up … and this is what I like most about them and look forward to with great anticipation.
If I am in front the TV for any reason I will listen for a few minutes because sometimes they can be quite entertaining as I found Mia to be tonight.
I found her entertaining because she turned the tables so completely on her opponents ….. I like to see that.
Hansard takes ages to become available.
It is useful in its current form to study debates from the 60’s and 70’s; historians from future generations will no doubt study this particular budget debate.
… to think I used to make time to sit and watch the “epic” budget debates of the past.
It took me ages to figure out what I know about politicians, …. sad to admit, I am that slow.
50% Bajan // July 9, 2008 at 2:08 am
Here we go again! The political bias on this blog is deafening. As a neutral, I saw nothing wrong with the leader of the opposition’s reply to the budget. I actually learned a few interesting things e.g. the comparative percentage oil increase of the past government of 38% and this government and the difference in how both situations were/are being handled.However I think it is also stupid to be critical of the physical appearance of the opposition leader or Prime Minister, I fail to see how that helps us as a nation. The people of this country has given the mandate to David Thompson and DLP to run B’dos on Jan 15 and all eyes are on him . Are we going to continue to hear constantly about the failings and wrongdoings of the BLP as a defence to every argument against this present government ? We know all about the cost overruns, squandermania etc. so we figured it was time to get them out. How much longer are we to dwell on this when the people’s business needs attention.I think the people of this country needs the guidance and leadership that they were told they were getting that is why BLP was voted out. Election campaigning still going on in Barbados it seems . Chris Sinckler made mention at a political meeting during the election campaign about “Animal Farm” and somebody standing on their hind legs. I think the changing of the Commandment “Four legs good ,Two legs better” may be a more appropriate reference from the George Orwell book. By the way ,the last time I checked ,mainly poor old people still using oil stoves and a lot of pensioners riding bicycle with number plate. We live in some serious times and I shudder to think of all the uncertainty that lies ahead.
David // July 9, 2008 at 4:32 am
@Chris
Hansard is available but like someone said only in written form and there is a heavy lag before it is made current. If you want to view Hansard you have to arrange with the librarian to visit parliament and have a read. The video version of debates is recorded by CBC but owned by parliament and is not available to the public for sale or viewing on demand.
@50% Bajan
We believe most Barbadians are entitled to know what kind of squandermania has taken place and if in fact there was corruption. It become a credibility issue not only for the DLP but the BLP as well. The process when done helps to send a message to the government in waiting or any government that it should not be business as usual. Minister Richard Sealy summed it up well we thought when he used the argument to show how inept management of projects i.e. GEMS and the Hilton is having an impact on current decision making.
Mama Mia!!! // July 9, 2008 at 5:30 am
Mia declares she worth a cool 3.5 mil! Does anyone believe that shit? I don’t
MIA WORTH $3.5 M
Published on: 7/9/08.
by ALBERT BRANDFORD
MIA’S ASSETS EXPOSED!
In a dramatic and unprecedented development last night, Leader of the Opposition Mia Mottley publicly declared her assets and liabilities to the House of Assembly and challenged ruling Democratic Labour Party (DLP) MPs to do the same.
According to the document, as at June 30, 2008, Mottley has assets totalling $3.5 million and liabilities of $1.5 million.
The assets include houses at Frere Pilgrim, Lodge Hill and land at Cattlewash; three bank accounts; one vehicle; a credit union account; shares and mutual funds; part ownership in St Lawrence Management Inc. (which owns a condominium) and Barefoot Chattel Resorts Inc. and is settling a partnership agreement for 50 per cent of E.D. Mottley & Co. plus salaries from that company and as Leader of the Opposition plus $4 000 a month in rent from Frere Pilgrim.
Mottley’s revelations, the first by a Barbadian politician, stole a march on the DLP which had campaigned in the run-up to the January 15 general election on a platform that painted the then ruling Barbados Labour Party (BLP) as corrupt and guilty of a lack of integrity, transparency and accountability as well as of poor ministerial conduct after 14 years in office.
DLP president, now Prime Minister, David Thompson had promised that within the first 100 days, the new Government would enact a Freedom of Information Act and set up an Integrity Commission which he said would enforce existing anti-corruption laws.
He said the act would impose an obligation on a person in public life to make financial disclosures regarding his/her office or offices, his/her income, assets and liabilities and the assets of his spouse or relatives and all gifts made to him/her which exceeded a specified value.
Once the act came into force, he added, any minister or senior officer of Government would be required to make such a “disclosure” within three months of the passing of the new legislation.
In her 195-minute Reply to the 2008 Financial Statement and Budgetary Proposals delivered by Thompson Monday evening, Mottley said she was satisfied that MPs who wanted to serve in public life would have to face the legislation.
“There is more there to protect the innocent than to prosecute the guilty,” she said. “There are more people in Barbados who are innocent but because of the nature of a small society and the viciousness of partisan activity and rumour that invariably people who are not guilty of anything have their names tarnished.
“Therefore, you have a system which only reflects a mechanism for being able to trigger investigations – because the Prevention of Çorruption Act is there to deal with substantive corruption.
“In that context,” Mottley said, “I believe I have a responsibility to lead by example today by submitting as a document of this Chamber, and will do so as I sit, a full declaration of assets that I own and liabilities in this country.
“And I do so cognisant that while it may be inconvenient for my business to be made public, it is far more convenient for me to do so as an example of leadership.
“I invite the Prime Minister to join me because if he is as sanctimonious, and if he is as serious about transparency and accountability as he said that he was, then I believe that as leaders of the political parties, then both myself and the leader of the Democratic Labour Party should declare publicly.”
Mottley said the BLP group in Parliament agreed they would want members of the DLP to join them and agree “that as of next week, we will submit declarations of assets to the Governor General to hold in trust until such time as an Integrity Commission is functional”.
She disclosed that former Prime Minister Owen Arthur would follow suit with his declaration today.
boredickey // July 9, 2008 at 6:23 am
Someone said on Morning Barbados this morning that “lots of serious points were made” by Mia yesterday and that it was good theatre. Personally I thought her presentation was lackluster and more suited for the corner of Eagle Hall on a rainy night.She reminded me of Chris Gail swiping alll over d place until the body-blows by Chris released the hot air that provided the ambience for stupid Glyne Clarke to show his grammatical skills, and he should STOP saying he was a school teacher. If journalist Joe Broome was still alive, each time Glyne got up to speak Joe would say “MAN SIT DOWN!”
I look forward to hearing OLD Brigand today….GULP!GULP!
JC // July 9, 2008 at 6:28 am
Mia stupes
boredickey // July 9, 2008 at 6:34 am
WIV, your earlier comments scare me. The world is already S (see)rewed up.But yes, I too feel that Mia will try the marriage route just like shorty did in her quest to become this island first “woman” PM. Maybe she’ll mary a Guyanese man.
Anon // July 9, 2008 at 6:43 am
I noticed that Mia did not mention her shares in Jose y Jose and other companies.
I wonder why?
Tony Hall // July 9, 2008 at 6:53 am
She had some points but I wasn’t fully impressed. Too much personal stuff. What I think she did was to put the PM on the spot by declaring her assets. Let us see how the PM responds to her invitation.
Darnley L. Pinder // July 9, 2008 at 7:13 am
I would like to hear bush tea and wishing in vain say something about the CBC insurance and the RDC. And i dont want the foolishness about the BLP cant speak about coruption because they are corrupt themselves. Deal with the issues in an intelligent way.
Darnley L. Pinder // July 9, 2008 at 7:15 am
THe PM is going to say no one can set his timetable and he is going to declare his assets when the time is right.
David // July 9, 2008 at 7:19 am
@Darnley L.Pinder
We agree that we should hear more on the CBC and RDC matter and we suspect we will. On the matter of declaration of assets surely you jest? It is the DLP who has been bold enough to make this an issue. According to Adrian H Mia is trying to ‘tief’ the issue to wrestle the initiative from Thompson in a big foot move i.e. declaring her assets. It will be interesting to hear how the PM responds. They have already stated that they have started a process towards rolling out integrity legislation. After waiting 14 years on Sir Henry Forde a few months will not hurt.
Brutus // July 9, 2008 at 7:34 am
There were many matters of interest in the budget replies to date, but I am struck most by
(1) Chris Halsall’s queries about access to the official record of the debate – perhaps some of us should call or write to the clerk of parliament to get the facts and exert pressure for easier and faster access to the transcripts.
(2) The leader of the opposition upstaging the government by making “a full declaration of assets that I own and liabilities in this country”. This is a great step forward but the words “in this country” surely require clarification.
Adrian Hinds // July 9, 2008 at 7:41 am
At any rate the people of Barbados are well on the way to having some level ITAL amonst the political class. Thompson has to stop this hedging foolishness. This would be the second legacy making initiative that he almost give way to the BLP. The other being family first. Thompson let the people and the pulse of the people be your guide. It is the single most reason why i have been as accurate and consistent in my political opinions over the years. Democracy is about the people, and if you never stop listening to them, you will appear as though you are never wrong.
Owen’s declaration gine a lot of fodder, no matter what he agrees to make public. If he has over 2 million there will be a lot of questions about it’s accumulation, coming from man that 14 years ago could not afford gas money. So sorry we will not be privy to Barney Lynch money story.
Adrian Hinds // July 9, 2008 at 7:45 am
All Chris or Brutus or whomever else think they should have video of the proceedings should do is purchase a pc with a TV tuner card or the now very cheap usb tv tuner key. Maybe i can send my old sony viao to someone on the rock with the explicit promise that they record all sittings of the house. Who can i trust? :D
Brutus // July 9, 2008 at 8:04 am
Update:
The text of the budget speech is posted at http://www.barbadosparliament.com.
There is a link for video of the speech too, but I am still trying to figure out if I can access it without logging in (or how I can log in).
Adrian, the point was that the transcripts of debates in parliament should be readily accessible to the public.
Adrian Hinds // July 9, 2008 at 8:17 am
Brutus // July 9, 2008 at 8:04 am
Update:
The text of the budget speech is posted at http://www.barbadosparliament.com.
There is a link for video of the speech too, but I am still trying to figure out if I can access it without logging in (or how I can log in).
Adrian, the point was that the transcripts of debates in parliament should be readily accessible to the public.
=================================
Brutus i very much understand the point, but this is Barbados where it is not unusual for a decade or two to go by before the right and democratic things are done. I do not have any interest in waiting for information from persons in whose interest the delay serves. Mia don’t want to wait on an ITAL policy she wants declaration of assets now. I want my information now too.
Bajanboy // July 9, 2008 at 8:19 am
Mia also owns a villa on the West Coast, in Queen’s Fort. Don’t believe for a minute that her net worth is only $2 million.
John // July 9, 2008 at 8:37 am
“In that context,” Mottley said, “I believe I have a responsibility to lead by example today by submitting as a document of this Chamber, and will do so as I sit, a full declaration of assets that I own and liabilities IN THIS COUNTRY.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No two ways, she completely turned the tables on her opponents, all the way through 177 degrees.
All she has to do now is to also declare the assets she has OUTSIDE of this country to fully catspraddle them and go for the 180 degrees.
The DLP must be in chaos after her move, and she can still turn the screws tighter by going all the way with the declaration.
Quite apart from throwing the cat among the pigeons of the DLP she has also accomplished something else.
I figure she will have suitors lining up from all over the world to court her, … and she hasn’t even let them see all of her assets yet ….. talk about coy and playing hard to get.
Wonder if Owen will declare the liability associated with his divorce settlement? … all the same he may have paid that in cash to avoid accruing liability.
…. and then there is Glyne, ….. we might get to find out more about the arrangements with his special friend’s house in Lower Birneys.
But I have to say, congrats to Mia for showing up the other 29 parliamentarians for what they are.
Funny what a little courage will do!!
NUFF RESPECT DUE!!!
John // July 9, 2008 at 8:39 am
…… remember, besides being a politician she is also a lawyer!!
John // July 9, 2008 at 8:51 am
… from the Free Online Dictionary …
sanc·ti·mo·ni·ous (sngkt-mn-s)
adj.
Feigning piety or righteousness: “a solemn, unsmiling, sanctimonious old iceberg that looked like he was waiting for a vacancy in the Trinity” Mark Twain.
——————————————————————————–
sancti·moni·ous·ly adv.
sancti·moni·ous·ness n.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
——————————————————————————–
sanctimonious
Adjective
pretending to be very religious and virtuous [Latin sanctimonia sanctity]
Collins Essential English Dictionary 2nd Edition 2006 © HarperCollins Publishers 2004, 2006
ThesaurusLegend: Synonyms Related Words Antonyms
Adj. 1. sanctimonious – excessively or hypocritically pious; “a sickening sanctimonious smile”
holier-than-thou, pharisaic, pharisaical, self-righteous, pietistic, pietistical
pious – having or showing or expressing reverence for a deity; “pious readings”
Based on WordNet 3.0, Farlex clipart collection. © 2003-2008 Princeton University, Farlex Inc.
——————————————————————————–
sanctimonious
adjective pious, smug, hypocritical, pi Brit. (slang) too good to be true, self-righteous, self-satisfied, goody-goody (informal) unctuous, holier-than-thou, priggish, pietistic, canting, pharisaical
Collins Essential Thesaurus 2nd Edition 2006 © HarperCollins Publishers 2005, 2006
John // July 9, 2008 at 8:51 am
… lawyers could curse one another too sweet!!
Darnley L. Pinder // July 9, 2008 at 8:59 am
@David, she should not be able to “teif” anythingfrom the DLP. The PM said that before asingle minister is sworn in they must first declare their assets. So she is not “tiefing anything, she is calling his bluff. And remember what i said he is going to say.
UWI Student // July 9, 2008 at 9:08 am
I agree with 50% bajan. Leave the “appearance” bashing and insults for the rum shop, and take a neutral or objective outlook on these proceedings. David Thompson made a good speech, and Mia gave a good rebuttal. It was not all over the place, she made some good points, although i didn’t like the fact she made some personal attacks on some people. Whatever decision David Thompson makes, i hope its for the sake of the society, and not just to score political points.
Centipede // July 9, 2008 at 9:11 am
Mia has a point. The DLP had a lot to say about reducing the cost of living but this budget does not address this at all.
BTW – a lot of ex-BLP politicians were in the House, I understand, to hear Mia’s reply, but was ‘instant millionaire’ Lynch one of them???
HIT FUH SIX! // July 9, 2008 at 9:16 am
Mia Mottley Declares Her Assets!
Hits David Thompson for SIX!
http://www.nationnews.com/story/360180682472633.php
MIA WORTH $3.5 M
Published on: 7/9/08.
by ALBERT BRANDFORD
MIA’S ASSETS EXPOSED!
In a dramatic and unprecedented development last night, Leader of the Opposition Mia Mottley publicly declared her assets and liabilities to the House of Assembly and challenged ruling Democratic Labour Party (DLP) MPs to do the same.
According to the document, as at June 30, 2008, Mottley has assets totalling $3.5 million and liabilities of $1.5 million.
The assets include houses at Frere Pilgrim, Lodge Hill and land at Cattlewash; three bank accounts; one vehicle; a credit union account; shares and mutual funds; part ownership in St Lawrence Management Inc. (which owns a condominium) and Barefoot Chattel Resorts Inc. and is settling a partnership agreement for 50 per cent of E.D. Mottley & Co. plus salaries from that company and as Leader of the Opposition plus $4 000 a month in rent from Frere Pilgrim.
Mottley’s revelations, the first by a Barbadian politician, stole a march on the DLP which had campaigned in the run-up to the January 15 general election on a platform that painted the then ruling Barbados Labour Party (BLP) as corrupt and guilty of a lack of integrity, transparency and accountability as well as of poor ministerial conduct after 14 years in office.
DLP president, now Prime Minister, David Thompson had promised that within the first 100 days, the new Government would enact a Freedom of Information Act and set up an Integrity Commission which he said would enforce existing anti-corruption laws.
He said the act would impose an obligation on a person in public life to make financial disclosures regarding his/her office or offices, his/her income, assets and liabilities and the assets of his spouse or relatives and all gifts made to him/her which exceeded a specified value.
Once the act came into force, he added, any minister or senior officer of Government would be required to make such a “disclosure” within three months of the passing of the new legislation.
In her 195-minute Reply to the 2008 Financial Statement and Budgetary Proposals delivered by Thompson Monday evening, Mottley said she was satisfied that MPs who wanted to serve in public life would have to face the legislation.
“There is more there to protect the innocent than to prosecute the guilty,” she said. “There are more people in Barbados who are innocent but because of the nature of a small society and the viciousness of partisan activity and rumour that invariably people who are not guilty of anything have their names tarnished.
“Therefore, you have a system which only reflects a mechanism for being able to trigger investigations – because the Prevention of Çorruption Act is there to deal with substantive corruption.
“In that context,” Mottley said, “I believe I have a responsibility to lead by example today by submitting as a document of this Chamber, and will do so as I sit, a full declaration of assets that I own and liabilities in this country.
“And I do so cognisant that while it may be inconvenient for my business to be made public, it is far more convenient for me to do so as an example of leadership.
“I invite the Prime Minister to join me because if he is as sanctimonious, and if he is as serious about transparency and accountability as he said that he was, then I believe that as leaders of the political parties, then both myself and the leader of the Democratic Labour Party should declare publicly.”
Mottley said the BLP group in Parliament agreed they would want members of the DLP to join them and agree “that as of next week, we will submit declarations of assets to the Governor General to hold in trust until such time as an Integrity Commission is functional”.
She disclosed that former Prime Minister Owen Arthur would follow suit with his declaration today.
no name // July 9, 2008 at 9:21 am
Mia declared Barbados assets worth $3.5. What about assets in the USA?
no name // July 9, 2008 at 9:34 am
Ms. Mottley, Bajans are not that stupid. Declaring assets means declaring ALL assets, not just some.
Same goes for the whole crowd BLP & DLP.
This includes assets in Miami or wherever.
Trained Economist // July 9, 2008 at 9:40 am
I am having great difficulty interpreting the comments about the impact of the revenue raising measures on inflation and costs in Barbados generally.
I would find some of the comments far more informative if the one time increases were set against say the annual revenues or profits of the affected entities.
So for example, how does the projected 6.6mil in revenue from increased insurance premiums compare to the revenues of profits of that industry? How does the increase in annual registration fees of $1,250 for an attorney or a dentist compare to typical annual revenue or net income for these service providers?
We would therefore be in a better position to assess the impact and whether there is really a case for price increases or an excuse for price increases.
Andrew // July 9, 2008 at 10:24 am
Tonight, during wrap-up, I expect that all the assets that weren’t declared will be uncovered and with documentary evedence too!
Moving along – Hammy Lashley sided with DLP in debate this morning. I hope he is good at ducking from chairs and other pieces of firniture
Centipede // July 9, 2008 at 10:24 am
It’s not too late for Thompy to make adjustments. Let’s hope (in vain?) that he won’t be that pig-headed to do what is right.
He had a lot to say about ‘cushioning the rising cost of living’ but this Budget does not address this to any big degree. Instead of the Government seeking to put more money in its coffers it could perhaps have reduced the Govt tax on diesel and gasoline and on a wider ‘basket of food.’
Andrew // July 9, 2008 at 10:25 am
Should be ‘evidence’
Tell me Why // July 9, 2008 at 10:26 am
This is an open submission to Trained Economist.
I have been reading your submission and I can fairly say that you should rename yourself as Trained Auditor. To make your case, you keep harping on the daily, weekly and monthly costing on the proposed increases. Remember, in the final analysis the real impact is shown in the P&L at the end of a financial year. If a $5,000.00 increase in licence, a $15,000.00 per month increase in electricity, a $2,000.00 in water, a $15,000.00 increase in salaries, a maintenance and replacement bill of $60,000.00 and most of all a reduction in room stock will show in your annual report and will be able to tell if you will remain or go into liquidation. That is the common fact, if we have so many negatives affecting this sector and to compound it with the 1000% increase in drivers’ permit, do tell me, are we serious in protecting the vulnerable poor who are employed in this sector? Economics deal with long term influences, not a three-month fixed.
Tell me Why // July 9, 2008 at 10:34 am
By the way TE.
Can you clarify the economics regarding the “free bus ride’ scenario. If students pay $2 million in cash to the Transport Board and the Government subsidies it with 3 million, how on earth that total lost to revenue will be 11 million? Can you please break down in layman’s term what the additional 6 million is for? Should I be risky in stating that this excess might be used as a fuel subsidy.
bajan2nv // July 9, 2008 at 10:42 am
In just six (6) months of DLP rule Barbados is now back to the stage of the early 90’s. The DLP Government has create a sense of panic and fear in the hearts of all Barbadians.
The former PM, The Rt Honorable Owen Arthur did warn that “this is not the time to gamble with you future” in the last election campaign but many did not take heed.
The current government is not ready for the task of running this country, the current goventment is not prepared with what it takes, or will take, to run this country. Many of the borrowed policies and programs of
the DLP’s last manifesto are not pratical for this country now or in the near future. The borrowed campaign for CHANGE can only take you so far.
A proactive leader would not implement programs and policies (eg. Raise In Diesel prices) only to change the same within weeks. This too will soon happen with the recent raises in Vehicle Road Taxes and Visitor Driver Permit Fees.
How can you be trying to lower the cost of living when the policies implemented are actually taking more money from the average small man? We are now paying more for Gasoline, electricity, telephone, diesel, food, road tax, use of cellphones, beverages, alcohol, tabacco and almost everything else. Next year we will be paying more for professional services -: dentists, doctors etc.
TIME FOR CHANGE… AGAIN.
Trained Economist // July 9, 2008 at 10:55 am
Tell me why,
My point is telling about a 100% increase in an annual fee or any cost tells me little about the increased costs of units of output, which then feeds into your unit pricing, whatever your output is.
I took an auditing course one, and I have taken too many economics courses, but commonsense says that a 100% increase in a cost that constitutes less than half of 1% of your total costs has a rather different impact than a 10% increase in a cost that is 25% of your total costs. Which is what I am getting at.
John // July 9, 2008 at 10:57 am
Andrew // July 9, 2008 at 10:24 am
Tonight, during wrap-up, I expect that all the assets that weren’t declared will be uncovered and with documentary evedence too!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I hope so ….. with 29 MP’s still to go it should be easy for David to reel them off and still be talking tomorrow.
Is it illegal for a Bajan to own assets overseas?
I am just trying to understand Mia’s stress on the phrase “IN THIS COUNTRY”.
This might very well be the obstacle these poor people in Parliament face, they may be in breach of the law.
How can they declare assets, the ownership of which might be in breach of the law?
Poor, poor people …… they are between a rock and a hard place!!!
… guess the politicians give a whole new meaning to the famous call to action …
“Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more;
Or close the wall up with our English dead.
In peace there’s nothing so becomes a man
As modest stillness and humility:
But when the blast of war blows in our ears,
Then imitate the action of the tiger;
Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood,
Disguise fair nature with hard-favour’d rage;
Then lend the eye a terrible aspect;
………….
……….
……
Follow your spirit, and upon this charge
Cry ‘God for Harry, England, and Saint George!’
“Henry V” (5.3.44-51).”
ROBOT // July 9, 2008 at 11:09 am
hey bajan
i agree wid you
you are so right
i said a similar thing at a different time
but you are right on
WE ARE IN TROUBLE !!!!
maybe t-h-om-p-SON cannot function in an environment other than the 1991-94 type environment
Redds // July 9, 2008 at 12:04 pm
Is Peter Wickham on the radio defending the right not to declare assets, he showing his partisan ass
Tell me Why // July 9, 2008 at 12:25 pm
I took an auditing course one, and I have taken too many economics courses, but commonsense says that a 100% increase in a cost that constitutes less than half of 1% of your total costs has a rather different impact than a 10% increase in a cost that is 25% of your total costs. Which is what I am getting at.
……………………………………………………………………..
I never took any course in accounts or economics, but I can fairly say that I use logic against recklessness to reach my conclusion. I am looking at it through an economic eye. With a 1% here and a 1% there will add up to a big percentage point. Forget the small percentage and realise an increase is an increase regardless how you look at it and will affect the bottom line.
Trained Economist // July 9, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Well we agree to disagree.
Cynty // July 9, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Regarding Mia’s ‘assets’ I thought she owned a house in Bathsheba as well, what used to be the old bakery? and Jose and Jose? hasn’t she some interest in that or is that another branch of this crooked family?
Tell me Why // July 9, 2008 at 1:14 pm
Why hampered on Mia, the spotlight should be the person who was to implement it. Let’s be realistic, she had the honesty to submit her assets. Deal with the ones who have agendas.
Technician // July 9, 2008 at 1:28 pm
What I would like to know….is what their assets were 14 years ago?
Technician // July 9, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Coming now with this disclosure makes no sense and the BLP knows this …what it does however is put the DLP on the spot.
Now we can see the growth from the beginning.
Redds // July 9, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Technician or Wickham I heard you on brasstacks already, don’t try to downplay her act, let your walk the walk
Adrian Hinds // July 9, 2008 at 2:47 pm
Good points Technician, but both parties are, and have been playing politics with this issue. The historical view of ITAL’s legislative ” near misses” is more favourable to the BLP than the DLP. The DLP has always been against it, and David Thompson’s promises signal a real shift to the people on this issue, but he is one person and although he is the PM and leader to us, he remains nothing more than the “first amonst his equals” and that is now very true as it was under Owen. Mia fully understanding the backfoot the BLP is on, wasn’t willing to give up the BLP’s better historical argument on this issue. Her move last night has put this issue back in the BLP hands. No matter what Thompson does now, it will be Mia that started it. Politics is about perception. Hartley Henry did not earn his pay on this issue.
BTW: Mia Mottley dedicated her maiden LOTO budget response to all the WOMEN HEADING FAMILIES OUT THERE. Note she did not say mothers, which would leave her out, she said women which includes her. Could this signal Mia’s views on the DLP’s “Sukoorization” strategy? I think so.
Technician // July 9, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Redds…..are you an a** boy?
Never, ever again you put me in the same sentence as Peter Wick-ham!!
Respect due ya…….study ya head guy.
Tell me Why // July 9, 2008 at 3:19 pm
WOMEN HEADING FAMILIES OUT THERE. Note she did not say mothers.
……………………………………………………………………..
It is technically correct for her to use the word “women”. Would you not say “More women are becoming home owners”. I will be stupid to use “mother” in this context.
Tell me Why // July 9, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Hi Technician. I never knew Peter was my neighbour. Ah got one on you my friend.
Technician // July 9, 2008 at 3:39 pm
These partisan jokers does really mek ya laugh TMW.
Adrian Hinds // July 9, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Tell me Why // July 9, 2008 at 3:19 pm
WOMEN HEADING FAMILIES OUT THERE. Note she did not say mothers.
……………………………………………………………………..
It is technically correct for her to use the word “women”. Would you not say “More women are becoming home owners”. I will be stupid to use “mother” in this context.
================================
You can speculate on the technicality, i prefer to speculate on the possible politics of the statement.
Tell me Why // July 9, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Adrian. You are simply the best. When will I ever able to win with you. Anyway let’s move on to the task ahead.
Adrian Hinds // July 9, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Tell me Why // July 9, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Adrian. You are simply the best. When will I ever able to win with you. Anyway let’s move on to the task ahead.
=================================
When it comes to debates without preset rules, no one can win against me and so it should be for you.
…BTW a homeless man woman and child is still conciderd a family. Homeownership compliments but does not define a family, Mia is making it very clear, that Sukoo’s family structure maybe traditional but it is not the only kind of family there is in Barbados, and that of the other types she is not alone or excluded.
Andrew // July 9, 2008 at 4:51 pm
All the ole talk I still haven’t heard Mia’s alternate budget.!!
What would she have done if the bees formed the government?? Continue to allow the infelicities, that are uncovered almost weekly to continue?
What would she have done differently???
Maybe her apologists can help her out here???
Georgie Porgie // July 9, 2008 at 4:52 pm
The fact that WOMEN HEAD FAMILIES is to state that in the case of black folk following the institution of slavery that many homes are led by women in the ABSENCE OF MEN. In many (note I didn’t say all) of these families the women long to have a real man leading the home.
Whether or not people today uphold Biblical truths and ideals, it was ordained by God that the MAN is the head of the house. This is how it ought to be. The matriarchal society and WOMEN HEADING FAMILIES OUT THERE is essentially an ABERRATION , just as “that thing” is an aberration.
She can not eclipse what you call the DLP’s “Sukoorization” strategy. Mrs Sukoo’s family is led by a very nice man. The Suckoo family is composed of a MAN MARRIED TO A WOMAN; and they have children. The Sukoo family is the norm! It is the ideal!
It is common today in contemporary society to think that what we once used to believe and uphold as expoused in the Bible is nonsense; but does not make contemporary rhetoric correct.
I am sure Adrian, that you are the head of your home. I am sure that you believe what you were taught when you grew up; and that you believe that it is ordained that men should lead their households. I do realize too, that in your post that you are just reporting what was stated.
Georgie Porgie // July 9, 2008 at 4:54 pm
Andrew
Good points
You will find that “her?” apologists can NOT help her out here because essentially ONE CAN NOT DEFEND THE INDEFENSIBLE
iWatchya // July 9, 2008 at 5:31 pm
I find it interesting that when people get hit with a good sound debate style, that they ultimately turn to character assassination.
Why is that the Honourable Member for St John could not find it in himself to act a little more dignified while the leader of the oposition responded to his budget? He sounded like a school boy that needed to be sent outside to stand up by the door!
Where is his dignity as the PM?? I thought that he was about to walk out of parliment as before.
Although Mia’s style was flamboyant and theatrical, it did some VERY important things:
1. Rattle the opposition.
2. Show them that they need to respect the institution that they hold.
3. Remember their promises to the people.
4. Show up the poor level of work being done.
5. Show what little is being done to help the majority in their budget.
Adrian Hinds // July 9, 2008 at 7:14 pm
GP yes your last paragraph defines me, and my intent.
.Mia is such a political animal that if she gets up tomorrow and becomes convince that the path to the PrimeMinistership goes through traditional christian believes and practices she will give all appearance to be a practicing christian. If that path diverts through the institution of Marriage, look for her to get hitch to Ian Walcott. Um aint only in some far away cultures that arrange marriages takes place. :d Mia don’t much care what the men do, ah la “wunnuh need to learn tuh tek a horn” there by attempting to build on all that Henry Forde has done in regards to the family. Dedicating her rely to women and not men continue to show her spite towards wunnuh.
Andrew // July 9, 2008 at 7:46 pm
iWatchya //
That’s all well and good, but I still want to know what she would have differently
Andrew // July 9, 2008 at 8:00 pm
Listening to the debate that just broke for supper in the house.
Seems that Mr Michael Lashly might have proven that Mia’s declaration of assets document is just something she fixed up at the last minute.
It has no signature by an Attorney, No signature by an Accountant, Auditor or any body who could give validity to the document
Technician // July 9, 2008 at 8:06 pm
@ Andrew…I was just on my way home to post the very thing…interesting isn’t it?
David // July 9, 2008 at 8:08 pm
More interesting is the fact that the media in Barbados went along with the gimmick which played into Mia’s hand. What are to do?
Anonymous // July 9, 2008 at 8:08 pm
No surprise ther Andrew…..just another piece of chicanery….I could only laugh. Next thing she will pull a rabbit out of her hat.
Redds // July 9, 2008 at 8:19 pm
Why don’t the DLP ministers put theirs out there for scrutiny or are they going to scrutinize hers and then later bitch and moan and use her as an example/excuse of why they don’t want their whole lives exposed for the public to see. I heard many a DLP minister in the debate backpedlling today. Peter Wickham called her declaration gimmickry, but his justification today was the kidnapping incidents in Trinidad.
Bush tea // July 9, 2008 at 8:39 pm
David,
…not only the media, but I enjoy the way we all get worked up with stupid distractions.
What publish assets what?!?
…so when a MP disclose his/her assets this will ensure that they will not steal? or give special favours to family and friends?.. or take kickbacks? .. or wok for wok?
GIVE ME A BREAK…
All this will do is ive us something to chit chat about. Will the crooks not just pass the assets on to family, close friends etc on their own behalf? So do we check on the assets of ALL their friends and family?
You know how easy it is to set up overseas accounts? – especially when you associate with people like Danos of 3S?
National Supervisory Committee!
….the Co-operative approach is SO MUCH easier and cleaner and IT WORKS right here in Barbados…..
Oh Well….you can take a horse to water etc
Andrew // July 9, 2008 at 8:57 pm
Redds
I dont think it will be prudent for DLP members to try to pull the wool over the peoples eyes like Mia did
Andrew // July 9, 2008 at 9:03 pm
Redds
In fact I think the DLP should do things the right way.
If you start right, then you end right.
Dale Marshall now on tv showing up his party didn’t do anything for 14 years.
By the way where is O S Arthur?
Is it true that he absconded after Mia didn’t include him in her list of Great Prime Ministers
Adrian Hinds // July 9, 2008 at 9:26 pm
did Owen declare his assets as Mia suggested he would? Did he speak as yet?
Andrew // July 9, 2008 at 9:54 pm
My Gawd! What has happened to our former prime Minister!???
He is on TV now taking part in the debate…. A shadow of himself.
He turned up when George Payne departed.
JC // July 9, 2008 at 10:04 pm
ha ha ha you see he Andrew he has changed! He cam’t castigate no body more!
Getting it off my chest.... // July 9, 2008 at 10:08 pm
This is so funny, all the party hacks are now bobbing and weaving to try to get away from the fact that they have suddenly been made to look like fools.
They don’t want to post their assets so they obfuscate with notions about the formatting of the statement. They do not say anything about the salient point. THEY HAVE NOW LOST THE MORAL HIGH GROUND ON THE ISSUE OF POLITICIANS DECLARING THEIR ASSETS. In fact they are now on the defensive. As you can clearly see as they attempt to parse Mia’s statement on the matter, or find some loophole.
Andrew? What do you want? The woman showed you exactly how government could reduce the price of gasolene and diesel immediately without impacting on government finances. She showed that they could have zero rated a wider basket of foods months ago, and the list goes on and on and on. Face your boy Davey is looking downright amateurish.
David? This is not your finest hour on the blog. I’ll grant you the post was made before her speech was over, but your bias is showing. After MONTHS of campaigning for politicians to declare their assets, one of them does it and you immediately dismiss it as a gimmick???? You need to check yourself.
What you also may have missed is that Mia has removed from Davey the ability to revalue the economy later in his term and say that it was due to his management. Sorry Davey! If you were holding that one back for the future you’ve missed that opportunity as well.
More and more the DLP is being exposed as a bunch of bumbling amateurs who can only try to convince people how “bad” things were under the BLP as they send prices up and Bajans standard of living down.
JC // July 9, 2008 at 10:13 pm
Pleaseeeeee they sending our standard of living down when they raped the treasury and rape health, rape the immigration policies rape people when they dont lie down for houses and etc.
I had to get that off my chest!
Tell me Why // July 9, 2008 at 10:39 pm
Andrew. Which debate were you listening to? I read all your posts and you are a stranger from the truth.
Tell me Why // July 9, 2008 at 10:44 pm
I must say that the level of debate reach an unprecedented low with the presentation of the PM in waiting Freundel Stuart. Is this type of behaviour should come from an Attorney General and someone who act as Prime Minister. I feel all right thinking Barbadians regarding of political allegiance should reject this dismal performance by someone who should no better. David of BU what your feelings?
Redds // July 9, 2008 at 10:48 pm
TMY be scared, be very, very scared, I know I am.
Andrew // July 9, 2008 at 10:51 pm
Tell me Why
Stranger from the truth??
Well she ent say nutting new.
And you want to tell me that Michael Lashley didn’t show up Mia’s declaration of assets for the bogus document it was??
Other bloggers observed it too (or are u only reading my comments)
And u want to tell me that Owen looks his old vibrant self??
Which one ent true??
thoughtful // July 9, 2008 at 11:31 pm
Andrew, you must not be living on the same planet that we are. There is currently no code for ITAL and asset declaration, so who is to say Mia is wrong? The Dlp surely can’t. She set the standard, they must now come better. The way I figure, all this partisan nonsense MUST be put aside, this is not a joke time, things are only to get worse. Mia did what was right ,but late,under the sircumstances, no DLP member can critisize what they have not done.
Bajantease // July 9, 2008 at 11:48 pm
Damm the budget lasted two days before its being changed? It hasn’t even been adopted as yet. This is either the most responsive gov’t ever or one of the most confuse in the planning.
JC // July 9, 2008 at 11:50 pm
No one is perfect and it takes a big man to make changes and admit that he was wrong.
Mr. Arthur never did that he cussed every body!
joynice // July 9, 2008 at 11:58 pm
Hello!
I am a lady of 22, I found you hear and picked interest in you.
My name is Joy .I wish to be in love relationship with you
and may be discover ourselves as real partners for life. Please send your email address in my inbox ;; And not site please
With this email adderss( joy200muoka@yahoo.com )
Thanks from my heart;
Yours in love,
Joy.
J // July 10, 2008 at 12:04 am
Well, well, well. Mia was the only one with enough balls to declare her assets.
It is not a criminal offense for Bajans to hold assets overseas. How can it be when every PM goes overseas asking the diaspora to invest in Barbados. So you mean to say that my Bajan sister in New York can hold assets there but I cannot?
J // July 10, 2008 at 12:05 am
Sorry I meant testicular fortitude.
Not yet 21 // July 10, 2008 at 12:21 am
I am usually told by my parents that I do not pay enough attention to the political process. As such I forced myself to watch the “Reply to Budgetary Proposals” broadcast on CBC channel at 1:30 pm Wednesday July 9. The parliamentarian who had the floor at the time was Mr George Payne who happens to be my constituency representative. Mr Payne’s televised contribution to the proceedings was accompanied by frequent outburst of laughter coming from other parliamentarians. The member of the house seated next to Payne subsequently fell asleep with his face propped in is hands. The speaker of the house asked Mr Payne to refrain from incorrectly addressing the Prime Minister without using the term “ honourable”. After which Mr Payne continued to refer to the prime minister as he saw fit.
I gathered from the reactions of the other parliamentarians and the speaker that these occurrences are common place in the house of assembly. However I found it quite appalling that the members of the Parliament the leaders of our nation could not find the dignity and self respect required to conduct themselves like the educated and refined persons they portray themselves to be. What kind of example are parliamentarians setting for the populous when the ignore directives from the speaker? When they cannot give one another the common courtesy of maintain consciousness during the National Budget. I was in the Barbados Cadet Corps before I left Queen’s College and one of the things I learned from the Corps was to fix your own house before you fix others. I wonder how the parliamentarians plan to maintain our great nation in a state of prosperity when they cannot maintain a professional atmosphere in the house. I think each politician in this country needs to approach our political proceedings with more reverence and respect if they truly intend to assist our nation or inspire any level of respect from the younger Barbadians looking on.
Anonymous // July 10, 2008 at 12:58 am
Freundel staurt was his masterful self.
David thompson hit all the right notes and showed his desire to be responsive to the people by adressing the concerns of the new rental drivers fee.
He asnwered the queries raised by the leader of the opposition unlike owen arthur’s approch which was to ignore these questions – and all this was done without slander and inneundo.
Actually listening to the contributions of the DLP members which were all good to my mind – at least the ones I heard – it displayed to me a determination by the DLP to return barbados once again to the moral center.
Redds // July 10, 2008 at 1:19 am
Anonymous after the way Freundel Stuart (mainly) and the other barnyard animals from the DLP behaved so help us all. It really saddened me how despicable they behaved. I shudder to think that Freundel Stuart of all people is actually the AG/Acting PM. Shame on it all
JC // July 10, 2008 at 5:52 am
Redds, some persons on both size represented their constituencies and themselves well. Stop being buyous and lets deal with the truth (for a change).
bussa // July 10, 2008 at 9:29 am
REDDS was Mia ever AG/DEP PM of this country? Man you can’t compare the two.
Redds // July 10, 2008 at 12:15 pm
I never saw a debate before until this week, but Freundel Stuart left a lot to be desired, not just him Estwick also two animals if ever I seen some. I am making no excuses can you honestly defend these two actions. I don’t want it to be an indictment on the voters but I would be ashamed if I lived in their constituencies and help them get to parliament. It amazes me that they all stand up and thank their constituents for sending them to parliament but to have to behave so, I would be shaking my head, what does it say about the constituents.
JC // July 10, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Like it or not estwick and stuart were EXCELLENT!
Even the Bs at work talking about them why are you being so partisan!
I thought the Bs had their highlights as well; Du good do bad; Owen was subdued but for me it was a statesman speech.
But he has aged dramatically!
However, I waas very impressed with most of the debators.
ROBOT // July 10, 2008 at 4:34 pm
LIKE IT OR NOT
THIS IS NOT A BUDGET
THIS IS A MUGGET
BARBADOS HAS BEEN MUGGED BY A BANDELERO
Someone said the 'BLP Stalwart' // July 10, 2008 at 6:15 pm
It is clear to me that Mia’s approach is practical and at the same time sensitive to the challenges facing Barbados. On the same note, I feel a bit reserved in saying that the DLP leadership is not one of inspiration but one of IMF dogma. Who will protect us as citizens from the excessive of taxation? David clearly shows that he does not think in terms of alternatives. I have one clear choice and it has not only been demonstrated in her response to this thing called a 2008 budget, it has been manifested in every arena of public service for which the good lady commits herself. It is time P.M. Thompson learns that he must think out of the box because in a real sense, Barbadians will need a visionary leader who can inspire. The honeymoon is over.
JC // July 10, 2008 at 7:00 pm
two thirds majority two thirds majority we gine win by two thirds majority!
You remember those words up UWI (a student) wa slistening hmmmmmmmm
queen // July 10, 2008 at 8:30 pm
Chris Halsall
The Debate will be published in the Gazette sometime soon, if you know someone who works in a government dept. ask them for a copy.
Chris Halsall // July 10, 2008 at 10:23 pm
@queen.
Thank you. Deeply.
So, there is such a thing as the Gazette in Barbados. And, according to yourself, such a publication is available to anyone who works in a government dept, or who has the privilege of knowing someone who works therein…
So, pray tell… What about those who *don’t* work in a government dept., or knows anyone therein? Is this a document available to the public? And what exactly is meant by “soon”?
Please note that a Google search for “Barbados Gazette” reveals that the first publishers of such a document were David Harry and Samuel Keimer in 1731. And that our Constitution (Chapter 3) refers to such a publication…
Please forgive me for this, but I am finding a serious disconnect here….
Is our public information easily available to us? Or is it not? (Sadly, this is a rhetorical question….)
David // July 10, 2008 at 10:45 pm
@Chris
The Gazette is available to any member of the public from the government printery, for a fee od course.
Chris Halsall // July 10, 2008 at 11:39 pm
@David.
I know this, of course (why do you think I asked about it?). (Hint: ask questions to which you know the answers…)
And, truth be told, there is a great deal of other critical information which is only available (for a fee), if one knows what to ask for. Including (for example) our statutory instruments (SIs), our census results, our spectrum allocation and our telephony numbering allocation, et al…
What I find most interesting is that even the availably of this information (for a fee) is not generally known to most.
And, of course, even if one knows of the information being available (in paper-only form, of course), its access generally involves a human physically going to the office involved to pay for, and retrieve, said information (on sheets of dead trees!!!)…
If Barbados is serious about Transparency, it might consider making available to *everyone*, via this wonderful thing called the Internet, the information which might be of interest to *anyone* and *everyone*.
queen // July 11, 2008 at 7:54 pm
Chris,
It is a fact the Gazette is not really known of except in the public sector. Every dept. in govt receives them at least twice a month. They contain info such as who was appointed in govt, who has retired, who was granted a licence to sell liquor, who has been granted work permits, a report of what took place in parliament, etc. I must say it calls for interesting reading but I do not know why it is not readily available to the public or why the govt Printing dept or even GIS does not inform the public about it. but that being said, some civil servants don’t even see it either, even tho they should have access to it.
Chris Halsall // July 11, 2008 at 9:30 pm
@queen: Thank you for this.
IMHO, we live in a country, and a region, where people are discouraged from asking questions. Ignorance is the expected; the nominal; the easy to manage…
And our governments do nothing to encourage anything different. Gods forbid they make information easily available… As an alternative example, it is the enforced policy of the USA that *any* data or information generated with public funds are made (easily) available to the public. “Easily” now means Internet accessible.
This example of the Gazette is a perfect demonstration. This is a critical publication, and yet very few know about it, let alone have access to it, let alone read it…
If I may, there are things known as Statutory Instruments. These are often used by a government to apply deltas (read: changes) to their laws. And yet, our SIs are not readily available to the public unless you know to ask for them. (And show up in person, wait a great deal of time, pay some amount of money, and receive the information on *paper*!)
Therefore, one may be able to download from the Internet the Laws of Barbados, but without access to the relevant SIs, a full understanding of same cannot be reached.
Personally, I’m a very empirical kind of person. I listen very closely to everything I’m told, but then I tend to run sanity checks. Let me please present a couple now:
http://www.google.com/search?q=barbados+queen’s+printer
http://www.google.com/search?q=Barbados+Government+Printing+Office
http://www.google.com/search?q=Barbados+“Statutory+Instrument”
Again, personally, I consider Google to be a serious test. If you can’t find information desired via Google, then it likely doesn’t exist.
I would like to thusly argue the following: we, the people of Barbados, do not know our own laws.
And if we don’t, then how can we expect anyone outside our shores to be able to determine same, and, by deduction, have confidence in investing herein?
Namaste All
Chris Halsall // July 11, 2008 at 9:43 pm
Sigh… This is why I hate CMSs which don’t present a “Preview” button along side the “Submit” button…
WRT my immediate above, please Google for:
Barbados Queen’s Printer
Barbados Government Printing Office
Barbados “Statutory Instrument”
Also note, in the Geek: s/couple/few/
Gapp // July 12, 2008 at 9:50 pm
I not sure what was there to be impressed buy with the Opposition Leaders Political Gimicktry stunt she use as a budget reply… Barbadians really deserve better and thats the truth..
My view // July 14, 2008 at 11:17 pm
I thought the Budget was fair, balanced and redistributive in nature. It showed that there is a keen difference between the two parties.
I thought Mia Mottley’s reply was weak in that it rambled and was unstructured.
I am not offended by people like Redd. They are there for five years and, like it or not, Barbados has a great leader.
KC // July 22, 2008 at 6:12 pm
Blogs are great for getting people’s ideas and thoughts across, no matter what. So if someone wants to comment on Mia’s or anyone else’s appearance so be it. These people want to become prime minister and will have to represent the country on the international stage if they succeed. I should make it clear that like most younger Bajans, I do not have an affinity to a particular party. I will always vote for the person I think will do the better job. If said person proves me wrong, I have no qualms in voting them out. I have read the PM’s entire budget and although I am no expert, I was impressed. If the DLP deliver 1/2 of the measures in the budget during their term in office…props to them, they’d have done a good job. Barbados cannot sit by and do business as usual. Our main earner tourism, while apparently growing, is doing so at a much less fast rate as some of our competitors like St. Lucia, Cuba etc. Our attitude that this is the sweetest 166 square miles on earth has meant that we have rested on our laurels and been content with what we have, without making radical changes in the way we do things to make the country a better place for everyone. Dont get me wrong, I love bim, but I also think that we have nowhere realised our potential and can be so much better. I think the DLP have shaken things up which is exactly what we need. I am now, for the time being a DLP supporter, but the DLP should be aware that the minute the cracks, stupid mistakes, lies and thievery begin (if it does) I will switch my vote faster than the flyovers get ban!! I encourage everyone out there to do the same.
Wishing In Vain // July 22, 2008 at 7:24 pm
KC my compliments to you for a very mature approach to your politics.
Like you I to am very aware of the need to keep this country honest and on the right track, we were shown the worst display of what gross corruption and arrogance could lead a great country.
We are working hard on getting it back on track with every effort to cut out stealing in Gov’t as was the program under the rule of the blp.
Wishing In Vain // July 22, 2008 at 9:30 pm
We are now 189 Days into the DLP running the affairs of this country but yet the blp are still living in the past and have not yet come to grips that the were kicked out of office on the 15 th Jan 2008.
For had they been aware of that fact I hardly think that on the 22 nd July and 189 days forward their website would still be so dated with the nonsense as below.
Cabinet
The Rt. Hon. Owen S. Arthur, M.P.
Prime Minister
Minister of Finance and Economic Affairs
Minister for the Civil Service and Culture
The Hon. Mia A. Mottley, M.P.
Deputy Prime Minister
Minister of Economic Affairs and Development
The Hon. Dame Billie A. Miller, M.P.
Senior Minister
Minister of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade
The Hon. Kerrie Symmonds, M.P.
Minister of State in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade
The Hon. Noel Lynch, M.P.
Minister of Tourism and International Transport
Senator The Hon. Erskine Griffith, G.C.M, J.P.
Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development
The Hon. Gline A. Clarke J.P., M.P.
Minister of Public Works
The Hon. Reginald Farley, M.P.
Minister of Housing, Lands
The Hon. Cynthia Forde, M.P.
Minister of State in the Ministry of Education, Youth Affairs & Sports
The Hon. Elizabeth Thompson, M.P.
Minister of Energy and the Environment
The Hon. Rawle C. Eastmond, J.P. M.P.
Minister of Labour and Social Security
The Hon. Dr. Jerome Walcott, M.P.
Minister of Health
The Hon. Trevor Prescod, M.P
Minister of Social Transformation
The Hon. Anthony P. Wood, M.P.
Minister of Education, Youth Affairs & Sports
The Hon. Dale Marshall, M.P.
Attorney General & Minister of Home Affairs
Senator The Hon. Lynette Eastmond
Minister of Commerce, Consumer Affairs and Business Development
Rev. The Hon. Joseph Atherley JP MP
Minister of State, Prime Minister’s Office
The Hon. Clyde A. Mascoll, M.P.
Minister of State, Ministry of Finance