Governor General Sir Clifford Husbands (l) Opposition Leader Mia Mottley (c) Former prime Minister Rt. Hon. Owen S. Arthur (r)
There is the saying a week in politics is a long time. For several months Opposition Leader Mia Mottley has led her troops to push the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) government on a number of issues. The more notable have been the CLICO Affair and government’s housing program managed by Minister Michael Lashley. A recent CADRES poll has given Arthur a narrow lead over Mottley in national popularity, according to pollster Peter Wickham this is to be expected given Arthur’s profile as a former Prime Minister. The margin of error in the poll makes the difference irrelevant anyway. Although it has come as no surprise to BU the move by Arthur and cohorts to jettison Mottley as leader of the Opposition, the question arises why has it surprised Mottley and her supporters?
In October 2009 former Prime Minister Owen Arthur staged a press conference at UWI. The level of criticism which Arthur directed at Mottley during that press conference should have sounded the alarm. Dr. George Belle when asked to comment on what was an early sign of Arthur’s perspective on Mottley’s leadership stated the following, “the party decides who is the leader and a leader emerges. If a leader emerges who is a genuine leader, they will sustain their leadership and that is also politics”.
The Arthur cabal has issued Mottley a summons to attend a meeting on Monday at 10 AM. If we are to judge from the utterances of Arthur, Payne and Clarke this week, the decision has been made by a majority of the parliamentary group to support Arthur. Mia’s attendance (under protest if she decides to) would be to receive her job description to list her new role. Mottley has the option to play along, take the matter to the annual conference, cross the floor, resign from active politics or …. Barbadians should know very soon which path the embattled leader of the opposition will take.
BU finds Arthur’s push for the leadership at this time intriguing. They are some who have opined that the serious illness of Prime Minister Thompson has precipitated the grab. Arthur has never been a fan of Mottley and it was confirmed in his UWI press conference. Being forced from the leadership of the BLP after the defeat in the last general election has served Arthur well. He has had time to recharge hopefully and at the same time wait for the opportunity to pounce. He would not have anticipated less than three years into a DLP first term that opportunity would have appeared, it has and the cagey politician that he is, he has pounced!
Political pundits who want to remain dispassionate would be reminded of Dr. George Belle’s observation - “the party decides who is the leader and a leader emerges. If a leader emerges who is a genuine leader, they will sustain their leadership and that is also politics”.
Interestingly a similar scenario affected the DLP when Thompson won over the support of his parliamentary colleagues to trump Mascoll. At that time Mascoll to the consternation of many crossed the floor. BU believed then that it was a ‘cheap’ move by Mascoll and one which must still cause him sleepless nights given the events unfolding. Mottley, the political student she must be and a member of the Mottley Clan will not make the same stupid mistake. She has BLP blood coursing through her veins which blocks any idea of crossing the floor.
The rupture of the Mottley BLP relationship does afford her the opportunity to establish a credible third party, the country is ready but does she have the political capital?
Owen Seymour Arthur (I too love Owen) is a cunning fox. Do not under estimate Owen’s strategic powers. This move by the BLP will have devastating effects on the DLP —yes the DLP .Watch what KISSMYA says , watch it carefully.
Remember that over a year ago I predicted Chris Sinckler’s ascension and elevation up the political ladder. NOBODY can dispute that. It is there on BU for all to see.
Some serious rumblings will soon come upon the DLP. Kellman is a key man. Do not underestimate another short man from the North.——Bacchanalia in the DLP . Keep yuh ears to the ground and eyes to the sky
But look what da gone ( Dale Marshall included) and do to Mia Mottley. Was not Mia the same person that intervened between Eswtick and Marshall in the gun incident in parliament?
But look how stauchly Pressie defending Mia. Wonder if it got to do with Pressie and the criminal case he had recently when she was one of his legal counsel???
KISSMIA
I recognize that you do not know who to support in this BLP mess. You are trying your best to create spin about the DLP but it is not working.
On Monday evening your girl gone through the eddoes. I think that Owen Arthur may have to wear a helmet because last time it was said that Mia locked off Owen Arthur neck real tight and pelt about a lot of chairs.
The spin that the BLP do not air their dirty linen in public was always nonsense. It was because they were in Government and therefore any position could be offered for a compromise. Not in opposition, nothing to give.
Mia should resign on principle.
There is no good reason to remove her as Leader.
The geriatric brigade wants another feed at the trough.
@Hants
What they are doing, is it illegal?
Did you feel the same when Thompson took over from Mascoll?
In the other blog some commentators are writing that Mia’s gender is the reason that the “boys” have ganged up against her, nothing could be further from the truth; this is a power grab pure and simple. Arthur was never comfortable with Mia as Opposition leader and her margin of victory when the Parliamentary group elected her was paper thin. Arthur also thought that she would be unacceptable to the public as PM and tried to groom Mascoll as his successor thus his statement on the political platform that Mascoll was “co leader” of the BLP infuriated Mia.( I am sure others have heard the same stories about the altercation between Mia and Arthur over his comment).
I think Mia was looking at the past (as in Mascoll and the DLP) when she announced that she was contesting the post of Chairman of the Party. She wanted to cement her position as leader and was aware that Mascoll was not the Party Chairman when he was dumped as the de facto Leader of the DLP and Mia wasn’t about to let that happen to her. Perhaps that over reaching sealed her fate as the cold war between Arthur and Payne ( the Chairman) had given way to détente and the rest is history. Arthur who had been contemplating writing his memoirs is now on the attack as he envisions being PM again when he observes a weakened DLP Gov’t without Thompson at its helm, a Gov’t filled with green horn Ministers who are no match for him when it comes to economic and fiscal matters (the key concerns of Barbadians today).
To repeat a well worn cliché “It’s all over bar the shouting” the knives are unsheathed and the bell can’t be “unrung” so its up to Mia as to how she will make her exit, will it be “bloody and unbowed” or will it be just bloody?
@Sargeant. Excellent analysis. You are probably right. We certainly live in very interesting times.
Meanwhile, the bimmyconomy continues to run(?) on autopilot…?
A few things on the main topic and then one on Sargeant’s analysis.
Firstly, I think it is inappropriate how the matter has been dealt with in the public eyes, the attempt to remove Mottley coming across as a ‘night of the long knives’, ‘et tu Brute?’.
Albeit, maybe none of the ‘involved’ are in the role of Brutus.
There is also the reported attempt to weaknen Mottley’s Parliamentary power base by undermining one of her ‘support group’ i.e. Eastmond.
This indicates a clear ‘conspiracy’ to remove her fully and certainly.
Her only recourse now, if she wishes to ‘attempt’ to maintain control, is to take the matter to the BLP conference for a calling by the members. While this will not change the fact that the Parliamentary group has the calling on their leader, it will bring the matter to the conference forum and force a hearing by the general BLP membership.
However, this will be a ‘do or die’ action and could very well cement the future.
The other course of action is to back off, smile and let the ‘power men’ take control and very possibly, self-destruct in the next election.
Then her way will be fully clear and she will still be fairly young for 2018.
This appears to be Peter Wickham’s view, if news reports are correct.
Personally, taking a leaf from the Navy Seals ‘Who Dares Wins’.
So, its up to her.
That said, Sargeant above commented ‘v’t filled with green horn Ministers who are no match for him when it comes to economic and fiscal matters ‘.
That is largely irrelevant, particularly as it was the last administration who borrowed both directl;y and via BOLT arrangements to bring the current high level of debt and relatively inflexible fiscal position asit is now, that was not clever by any means.
Further, there are many highly qualified and experienced individuals in Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank tod raw on, economics does not have to be a prerequisite for the leader.
IF, yes ”IF’, as a result of PM Thompson’s possible resignation, the current DLP members owrk cohesively and as one, there is no reason why Chris Sickler cannot lead the party to a 2013 victory.
However, one suspects that any resignation from office of the PM will result in at least one challenge, that even when fails, will nevertheless depict discontent in the ruling party, that could cause consternation and impact also on any election.
Hence, the DLP members must take stock carefully and well, before actions that result from leadership structuring.
What the scenario does show however, is that no one has the automatic right to lead, but must earn it, their own party members demand that, now we as the average Barbadian must demand accountability, to ensure that such governance is on our best interests, no matter who ascends to the lofty position of PM, in eaither party.
If I were in a position to advise Miss Mottley – which I am not – but as a person not affiliated to any Party, I would say.
(a) Do not cross the floor.
(b) Do not start a third Party.
(c) Do not resign from politics.
Smile politely just say if that is what you wish, I agree. . . over to you. She has the support of her constituency – important – she can afford to wait. If she is to be Prime Minister of Barbados “her time will come.”
Do nothing to obstruct, just wait.
In a few years almost all of Barbados will be rolling at her feet.
She will reappear with stature; more formidable and be then “known” for putting the wishes of the BLP and therefore the concerns of the Nation before self.
No one could stand in her way , yes no one.
But hey, what do I know, but I have been right quite a lot in the past.
(1) I said David Thompson’s tactics were right – even before the election date was set – when he was being severely critised before the last election, and subsequent events would prove it.
(2) I said the DLP would win by a landslide and was called a fool and a dreamer.
(3) I said Owen Arthur is a “master tactician” and he would return for leadership..and it would be said, how could I refuse a call from my people.
This issue is not finished by any means, the reverberations will be cataclysmic
Politic all ’bout impressing stupid masses no? Appeal to lowest common denominator, claim “voice of people”. No man/woman who crave significance through popularity not velly worthy … never be my leader. Whole thing blasted foolishness… so many educated people commenting on foolishness… Foolishness no?
Give me an O
Give me a W
Give me a E
Give me a N
Uncle O, O want his share of the action. Say what you want, you got to agree this man has politics running thru his very veins. But he look like a real young boy in yesterday paper. This man just take off 2 and a half years and decide he ready now for a rumble. What I cant get over tho, is how politically he got Mia grabble up, biting out she swallow pipe and all the while saying ” I am trying to be civil about all this”.
Hilarious but nevertheless typical of Owen. The DLP will have a fight on their hands if he takes over the powerful position of leader of the opposition. Notwithstanding that, he is going to have a hard time against PM Stuart and Deputy Sealy or Deputy Sinckler.
George Reid, You know what you and that line of crap is no longer relevant much like you Mia and Owen fighting to stay relevant is your problem.
Dr R is being cussed because he is reminding everybody we have an economy to manage? To build a society does it not have to be done on the backside of a buoyant economy?
Cynthia Forde is Mottley’s one true ally but she is a lightweight. Mottley getting unfaired. Why did Owen endorse her taking over leadership after BLP kicked out in 2008 then turn around and tear her character to shreds in that infamous UWI interview? This is a no win situation for Mottley, Arthur and BLP. None will emerge from this looking good. The Dems simply need to stay united and they have a long reign ahead.
Like some one else said DLP loyalists should keep an eye on Kellman and Estwick to a lesser extent. Kellman is not a team player and his Napolean ego way outsrips his intelligence. Thompson had his number. Lets hope Stuart and Sinckler does too.
What are the issues in this desperate male grab for power.
Had David Thompson not taken ill, would this leaderless gang of 4 and its want-to-be leader be now making this last ditched grab for power? NO!
So what does Arthur really want? It seems obvious that he wants to rule but he does not want to be leader of the opposition, at least not for a long time.
Is it the glory and bragging rights that (I own arthur) for the second time has had to save Barbados. Is that what he craves? But, is he the only person who can do the jobs? If so, is Arthur the past and the present at the same time?
HASN’T OCCURED TO YOU THAT THE REASON WHY THERE IS NO CLAMOUR FOR ARTHUR, IS MIA MOTTLEY. Think about it! If there was no arthur, Mia Mottley would be the undisputed leader of the BLP, plain and simple.
As I recall Mia Mottley became Opposition Leader because 6 persons voted for her . She did not have to vote for herself. Arthur now does. That is your answer right there.
As I read in the newspapers, arthur did not attend the meeting last November because he expected to have been coordinated. IT DID NOT HAPPEN. As I understand from rumour, one persons abstained from voting then and Mia Mottley got 7 votes to Arthur’s one.
It is no question that Rawle Eastman seems to be the most respected member in Parliament today, far more so than even arthur. Isn’t Mr. Eastman on the side of Mia Mottley? Why are the most respected people in Barbados gravitating towards Mia Mottley?
I read yesterday that george pain said that the elders are not provided for in the constitution? What is his point? Doesn’t a persons become an adult at age 18? But is there any legal document that tells them to respect senior citizens, intellectually superior people in society, their parents or old people in general?
In the recent Wickham Poll, Arthur’s rating was 22%, Mia 18. Don’t you feel that in the worst recession since mankind could speak that being an economist should be of great currency? Therefore, shouldn’t Arthur’s ranking be more like 60+%?
Now back to the hostile male take-over of the BLP.
In this scenario, Arthur will have to vote for himself to become the political leader and leader of the opposition. That seems weak for a 3-term PM? Where is the clamour for him when he will have to vote for himself?
But who is with Arthur: judging from the nation newspaper archives, George pain who won his seat by 49 voted. toppin by 120 votes, dale marshall by 44 voted and gline clarke by a little more that 700. They have less than a 1000 vote majority between the 4 of them. Mia Mottley won in a traditional DLP constituency by 1655 votes.
But how can anyone say that Arthur is best to lead when Barbados has never had a female leader before? Aren‘t we then comparing apples and oranges? Does this issue have anything to do with leadership or power and bragging rights.
In essence what do you have. A group of four men who scrape home in a pan-cart at the last election, and a man (arthur) who HH said before only attends Parliament to get his name mark and collect a salary – now seeking to go back in the same “poor-rakey” parliament that will now be even more poor-rakey with PM Thompson who is ill.
Here is my final point. Are you telling me that even with a masters degree, I cannot become Prime Minister of Barbados because I am a woman? Does arthur accept that his two daughters should never become prime minister of Barbados? If so, then I see what the real problem is.
But what would cause a man to do that? I mean, go back in the same poor-rakey Parliament that will now be even more poor-rakey with the absence of PM Thompson?
This is what this issues is about.
@ Bajan Panday
Spare us the long drawn out non-sense you typed above. The fact that everyone is failing to accept is that politics is not Sunday school. Mia was given the position of Leader of the Opposition and performed that role. Having done so for nearly 3 years it is obvious she has NOT impressed the parliamentary group sufficient so as to cause them to believe she is the fastest and easiest way back to office. Mia was elected my the parliamentary group and she can and probably will be unelected by the parliamentary group. Her best bet is to salvage her political career by doing the right and proper thing, that is to resign.
@ Laeppa
“Mia was given the position of Leader of the Opposition and performed that role. Having done so for nearly 3 years it is obvious she has NOT impressed the parliamentary group sufficient so as to cause them to believe she is the fastest and easiest way back to office.”
Here is my response:
The fate of Mia Mottley is being decided by arthur who does not go to parliament because it is too poor-rakey for him; george pain who seldom goes, duguid, who does not live in Barbados, gline clarke who PM Thompson said you don’t know if he is speaking for the dlp or blp and two others who do not contribute a lot.
The BLP like to say that the slide in the Barbados economy stated after the 2008 inflationary budget. If so where was arthur? The only voices heard was Mia Mottley, Cynthia Forde and Rawle Eastman.
@Laeppa
So correct, cut and dry. Whatever the motive, the rules, and accepted processes are in play. Mia has no choice than to abide by them, or resign in protest, for it is by said rules and processes that she gain her position. It was up to her as LOTO to use patronage to maintain her leadership. That she may have, neverthe less the parliamentary team giveth and it can taketh away.
@Panday
Arthur has one vote in the process of deciding who leads the BLP parliamentary team. It is also within his right as it is with all the other members to canvass and solicit the support of their equals should they decide to challenge for the leadership. We are either a people that regulate of interactions with each other via stated laws, practices and conventions or we are react with our emotions to our whims and fancies. The man has done nothing wrong.
@ Adrian Hinds
Yes, but I think my point still holds. Rawle Eastman is the most respected person in the House and he seems to be with Mia Mottley and has a deep respect for women.
The five including arthur, seem to have a problem with a woman leading.
My second point is – for the past 2 1/2 years the voice of arthur, pain and toppin was silent on the radio during debates from the House.
What did Mai Mottley do wrong: carry the fight for the BLP in the House; expose Clico and the NHC fiasco or made a brilliant reply to the budgets and the Estimates?
What!
Do we in Barbados now fire people for doing excellent work? What next? Will the five fire Cynthia Fode?
Don’t tell me the people of Barbados fired the BLP because as I recall – the performance of the then BLP government was not the issue: cost overruns and corruption was, especially that $750,000 cheque.
@ Bajan Panday
If those same people you accuse of non-involvement made an overt effort to be more involved then you would have accused them of not given her (Mia) room to prove herself. You can”t have both ways.
“Rawle Eastman is the most respected person in the House and he seems to be with Mia Mottley and has a deep respect for women”
That is the equivelent of saying that menthol cigerettes are better for you than regular ones, or that beer is better for you than rum. None of them are good for you, you have to pick which is the least bad.
I don’t support either the BLP or Owen but look, the man has been asked to lead the parliamentary group and he is obviosly trying to do so with as little dislocation and humilation as possible. Mia should take the high road, her time will come, she does not have to burn down the house in an attempt to prove a point. The best points are proven by accompliments and recognition thereof.
Interesting that the invective is being hurled at Arthur but what about the BLP MPs who have removed their support for MAM to RHOSA?
@Panday
Your point does not hold. To do so it must be supported by facts. Rawle Eastmond’s so called “most respected person” title, does not change the sum, product, or quotient of his singular vote.
The remainder of your submission is your opinions, and herein lays the problem you and I will have. I am responding with ideas based on facts to the realities of these past events and those to come, you on the other hand are reliant on your feels and beliefs.
You know my political affiliation; I have been loyal to the BLP and that is where my support lies — with the political party as a mechanism for ensuring our continued liberties as well as the social, economic, and political development of all Barbadians.
I do not need to be caught up in the euphoria of political transitioning, but I will say, that my political party is not necessarily acting in a manner that I would have thought enlightened persons who should know better would respond to whatever challenges that exist.
@ Laeppa | October 15, 2010 at 12:38 PM | @ Bajan Panday
You said:
If those same people you accuse of non-involvement made an overt effort to be more involved then you would have accused them of not given her (Mia) room to prove herself. You can”t have both ways.
My response:
I am just saying that their respective constituents sent them to the House to represent their (the people’s) interest. Some are said to have tunred up ONLY to get their names mark while others just did not bother to stay. But on both occasion, accepted pay even though not having worked for it.
@ David
Yes. People seem to be focussion on arthur because were he not leadin the 4-man power grab squad of men who did not work for for the people for the past 2 1/2, while Thompson was well – but now want power and are making a sudden dash for power, people would hardly mind.
Would those five be making a power grab if Thompson was well – NO. Because they feel it would have been 10 years in Opposition. So they are merely seeeking to benefit and profiteer on the ill-health of PM Thompson.
That seems vulgar.
@ Adrian Hinds
What you are saying does make sense. Do not get me wrong. All I am saying is that even in China or Cuba, a persons would not be convicted and sentenced and that invited to a trial.
That is what five men have done to Barbados’ female Leader of the Opposiiton.
It is being said that those five men were absent from debates in the House for close to three years and had PM Thompson taken ill, those five men would not now be ganging up on Mia Mottley because they felt it would have been 10 years in opposition.
What is her charge.
Is it doing a good jobs for the people of Barbados when those same five men were silent for the past three years or is it that she is capable of outlining a vision for development, as we read on HERE that she did at the recent BCCI luncheon without (I believe) any input from those 5 men?
So Mia Mottley is being fired for doing good work.
It is incorrect to say OA was silent for the past three years. At every sitting of the estimates he took a stance and made his reply. People might recall that at the second sitting last year, although he was present in Parliament but was not in his seat a time during the estimates, the PM tried to wrap up the debate without him. He has also been attending branch meetings on Sundays. Most Mondays we saw some report of what he said at a branch meeting the night before.
It would be interesting to find out how many times Parliament actually met since January 15 2008 and how many times thor 5 BLP men who now seek to replace Mia Mottley were present (not simply to get their names mark) but were actually present.
@ David
george pain said in the press recently that owen arthur did not attend the meeting at BLP headquarters because he suddenly fell ill.
This seems like a cause for great concern as Mr. arthurs suddent brief illness (as confirmed by george pain) comes at a time when PM Thompson is also ill.
Should person who want to become PM have first to see a panel of doctors? Would that be legal or reasonable.
Just asking since george pain said recently that Mr. arthur suddenly fell ill and could not attend a meeting.
quote above”Like some one else said DLP loyalists should keep an eye on Kellman and Estwick to a lesser extent”
The issue here is ‘Parliamentary Majority”, surely neitherKellman nor Estwick could command such, probably not even muster more than three other Parliamentary supporters?
Any attempt to refute Sinckler’s expected rise to leadership will only serve to indicate their angst at not being ‘the One and also indicate their unsuitability for the leadership anyway, Thompson’s act in putting Sinckler in charge of Finance was deliberate and effectively put an end to any ‘effective’ squabble.
A squabble by either of these two, or both, will froce the DLP leadership to cut them off, to prevent election fallout, otherwise these two surely could cause some seat losses, which is the only impact and does not assist their own causes.
The real question is whether Stuart is willing to play right-hand to a young leader in Sinckler.
If Stuart is unwilling, that in itself may cause the potentially most troublesome issue.
However, he may have no choice, if he wants to see 2013 success.
It is a pity Hendeson Bovell or Sylvan Greenidge have been MIA of late. Is it not true that at the last BLP annual conference Mia publicly requested the parliamentary group to meet to reconcile the leadership issue? Even then she knew there was some doubt in the camp, therefore why the outrage? Why was there not the requested meeting asked for by MAM?
9 + 12 =21 or 10 + 11 = 21. Looks like we are not sure who will emerge as a clear leader in the DEMS. Personally, a more appropriate equation looks something like this: 7 + 6+ 5+ 2 + Kellman = 21. I do not think we are any closer except to suggest that the BLP may have 2 main factions, but they are multiple in the DEMS at present and likely to intensify should, God forbid, sad news rock the country.
@G.C. Brathwaite,
The BLP has a leadership crisis. Focus on your party.
Explain how 5 respected MPs in your party can make a move to get rid of your leader without consulting stalwarts like you.
Forget the factions in these political parties. Let us focus on the honourable?Owen and his band of renegades who are trying to satisfy their lust for power and wealth.
Trying to divert attention away from the issue will not work on BU.
GCB You have a problem. Deal with it. We want to hear from you how the BLP leadership crisis is likely to end.
@ Hants
If you are to be believed that: “Owen and his band of renegades who are trying to satisfy their lust for power and wealth” and I have no reason to doubt you, then it does seem (using your accurate analysis) that the BLP really does not have a leadership crisis.
It is a question of the BLP’s past (arthur and his gang of 4) clashing with the future of the BLP (Mia Mottley). Based on what HH wrote in his column on Thursday and given your accurate analysis above – the BLP’s past is corruption while the future seem to be about change and a new politics as Mia Mottley said on You Tube.
Now, who will be lead speaker for the BLP when the prevention is corruption Bill is debated in the House. Will it be arthur (the $75,000 man) or pain (the rigger of the BLP internal poll for chairman)
Hants, there is no need for the gang of 5 to fire Mia Mottley because the DLP will bring the promised anti-corruption Bill on Monday, unless the gand of five plan to repeal the Prevention of Corruption Bill within the first 100 days in office – if they were to ever rule Barbados again.
Bajan Panday | October 15, 2010 at 4:03 PM |
@ David
“george pain said in the press recently that owen arthur did not attend the meeting at BLP headquarters because he suddenly fell ill.”
Is being blind drunk an illness? Just asking.
Efforts have been made to find out from those in Mia’s and Arthur’s constituencies what they feel about their leaders at this time. Why has no one sought to find out what St. Andrew constituents feel about George Payne, in the midst of this confusion? After all, he is doing more talking than either Mia or Owen.
@ Justice Seeker
What does it matter what the constituents feel or think about Mia. Owen or George, all of that is irrelevant. Either Mia can and does comment the majority support of the parliamentary group, recent events suggest she does NOT and can NOT. The majority rules especially on something as important as confidence in leadership. SHE MUST RESIGN or she will do untol, immeasurable harm to future political aspirations.
No Laeppa,
I think that she is right to fight for what she wants did she not fight to keep her female friends in order and in check ?
Her fight for leadership is also one to abort his White Knights commands and prevent Barbados from falling under more DANOS 3 ‘S and VECO and CAGE TYPE ARRANGEMENTs THAT SPELL CORRUPTION.
This charge against George Payne and the BLP is deeper than we first believed, this charge as was just reported to me is that George Payne is known to have forged signatures to register these people in favour of Owen in various constituencies.
With this being the case why would any of us not feel concerned by these developments that if the leadership of the BLP sees it fit to pad a voters list and forge signatures of persons for an internal BLP matter why would you feel that they would be honest and not pad a voters list or commit fraud and theft for a NATIONAL ELECTION ???
The hares are running and some bloggers have tossed their thinking caps in the air.
The DLP have no crisis, except one “manufactured” in the minds of some. They have a Prime Minister David Thompson, who has delegated the responsibilities of his office for an interim period to a properly elected Deputy Prime Minister, who is discharging his duties as and when necessary.
What will happen in the future, or is likely to happen is pure conjecture. When that time arrives, the problem if there is one can be dealt with.
The problems for the BLP are of a different magnitude, I said some days ago the end product of this will be “catalysmic” for them. . . I stand by that early asessment of their situation.
Yardbroom; Has the PM, now he is in Barbados, delegated the responsibilities of his office ….. to a properly elected Deputy Prime Minister? Is that gazetted somewhere? or is the PM, through officers in his Office, managing the duties of PM and Minister of National Security from his sick bed?
It would be interesting to know what is the true position. Reports in the Newspapers over the past few days since the PM has been back, refers to The Honourable Freundel Stuart as Deputy PM, not acting PM, as would have seemed to be appropriate to the situation if the PM had temporarily devolved his ministerial duties to Mr. Stuart.
Perhaps you can clarify the matter.
Yardbroom; I was wrong in my post above. I have just seen in today’s Saturday Sun a front page article that refers to Freundel Stuart as Acting PM. Therefore the PM has apparently delegated his duties at this time to Mr. Stuart.
Hi checkit-out,
To be honest I have no inside information and it would be dishonest to give the impression I do.
From my take of the situation Mr Freudal Stuart is Deputy Prime Minister; he would only be acting Prime Minister in “special circumstances” as certain responsibilities are only the remit of the Prime Minister. . . but as always there is a caveat I could be wrong.
@ David
Your above does not seem to hold, as regards the Parliamentary Group of the BLP, because arthur only seem to be able to get the four who it would appear – have a diffulty being led by a woman, to support him.
I tend to recall that in the recent Wickham Poll, Mia Mottley was more popular within the BLP than arthur.
In contrast, without a scandal manufactured within their own party or by elsewhere against them – Sinckler was 6.0 and Stuart 6.6., while Mia Mottley was at 18%.
As an Economist and a 3-term PM, arthur was a mere 22% but should have been much higher than Thompson who was at 42%, in circumstances where he was unable to function effectively because of ill health.
As I recall, the Won’t Say/ Don’t Know was some 42%. The DLP lost ground but the BLP with Mia Mottley whom the country was told would not be acceptable – gained impressive ground for the BLP.
Analyse that?
Let us look at what arthur said in relation to the findings of the recent Wickham Poll.
That arthur is clearly off the mark, as regards whether Mia Mottley will be acceptable – is your answer. Is his forecasting skills diminishing?
I am saying that PM Thomspon being ill has sharpened men’s appetite for power.
@opposition at sea
The only thing Mia is going to get on Monday is a toss through the provebial political window and the only question need be asked thereafter is whether she will bounce on not? She should resign (thats what everyone is telling her) ask H. Hoyte if you doubt me. I fully expect to read her resignation in the Sunday Sun tomorrow.
@ Bajan Panday
Don’t you think politicians are the most highly skilled readers of polls? If yes, don’t you think that majority of the parliamentary group has interpreted the poll and determinded that Owen S. Arthus the quickest way back to government?
SHE CANNOT EXPECT TO LEAD IF SHE DOES NOT HAVE THE MAJORITY SUPPORT. NO MAJORITY = YOU DON’T LEAD, SIMPLE.
What is far more interesting that the present BLP fight is the building tension within the DLP especially as it becomes clear the current PM won’t be able to continue. Stuart, Sinckler, Estwick and Sealy must all fancy their chances notwithstanding what the recent poll suggest. It is alleged that the two men with the most support is Stuart and Estwick with Sealy and Sinckler picking up the minor support here and there. Lets look at the possible combinations;
1. Stuart PM – Sealy Deputy = Very possible
2. Stuart PM – Estwick Deputy = Possible
3. Sinkcler PM – Stuart Deputy = Remotely Possible
4. Estwick PM – Sealy Deputy = Very Possible
5. Estwick PM and Stuart Deputy = Possible
6. Sinkcler PM and Estwick Deputy = Impossible even in the reverse.
@ Super Glue
And you are right.
If PM Thompson was well, “nobody” would have challenged Mia Mottley for anything because they would have felt it would have been 10 years least in Opposition.
Secondly, they would have been doing everything possible to avoid PM Thompson in debates in the House.
I have been reading the same Nation Newspaper as you and to me this issue does not seem to be about Leadership. It seems to be about corruption.
Every day, yet another list seems to be appearing where someone is engaging in electoral fraud and election rigging to the extent that money is being paid to register delegates in Rawle Eastmans constituency.
If someone would do such a corrupt act in Rawle Eastman’s constituency (who is not voting with them to remove Mia Mottley as LOO) then what do you think they are doing or would have done in the constituencies of their four buddies who oppose Mia Mottley?
Therefore by logical deduction, the issue facing the BLP does not seem to be leadership but corruption – manifesting itself as: “electoral fraud, election rigging and engaging in behavious which offends the constitution of the BLP *based on what I read in today’s Sun on Saturday.
@ Pajan Panday
I don’t think you can make a distinction between the people involved and corruption. However, I don’t matter what is the background to the decision making process for selecting a leader. They don’t want Mia, the faster she realises this the better off she will be. As for leader of the opposition, she is done, gone, finito, over and out of here.
Some facts gleaned from newspaper and other media reports:
The recent reshuffling of portfolios in the DLP cabinet effectively allowed the PM to remain PM with a much decreased workload. Therefore, from his sick bed with his mental faculties still sharp, but subject to getting tired quickly, he could ostensibly carry on the functions of Prime Minister when in the Island, merely having to delegate certain responsibilities to subordinates in the Prime Ministers office and the Ministry of National Security. In such a situation there would be no need for him to appoint an acting prime minister and his deputy would merely revert to his substantive position when Thompson was in the island.
In other words, when the PM was out of the Island attending to his health or otherwise, the Deputy PM would act as Prime Minister. When the PM was in the Island the reshuffle allowed for the PM to remain in the office of PM without having to officially delegate prime ministerial responsibility to his Deputy. The presumption here was that when he was in the Island the PM was physically and mentally capable of directing the affairs of his office from his home.
It would appear that the PM is now in the Island but the Honorable Freundel Stuart is acting as PM.
There are many questions that one could ask related to the above but I would ask just a few.
Is it likely that the PM is, at this juncture, both physically and mentally incapable of carrying out his reduced duties?
Could a foreknowledge of the above possibility be one of the reasons for the apparent urgency for the BLP opposition to change horses in mid stream?
In addition, there is a hint in one of lickmout articles in today’s Saturday Nation that a possible charge against Mia was that she did not vigorously take the opportunity to attack Thompson while he is fighting his illness. i.e. that she allowed a personal friendship with Thompson to blunt the vigour with which she should have attacked the party at this time. Could this be a hidden charge that Mia will have to face on Monday?
IMAGINE THIS!!!!
———————
China ratifies UN anti-corruption convention
BEIJING – To curb the flight of corrupt officials who abscond with public funds abroad to evade punishment, China’s top legislature ratified the United Nations Convention Against Corruption in a unanimous vote on October 27.
“The unanimous vote demonstrates the strong determination of the top lawmaking body to stamp out corruption in collaboration with the international community,” said Li Mingyu, member of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress.
With the approval by 157 members of the committee, China will become one of the first group of more than 30 countries to enforce the international law, which will go into effect on December 14 this year
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/GJ29Cb06.html
@Funny thing these BLP people | October 15, 2010 at 7:22 AM |
“George Reid, You know what you and that line of crap is no longer relevant much like you Mia and Owen fighting to stay relevant is your problem.”
Thanks, David for reminding your bloggers that after all the political brou-ha-ha is over, the problems that currently confront our economy will still remain, and will be addressed one way or the other. Either we take corrective action voluntarily, or our economy will involuntarily correct itself.
Those of us who have a smattering of knowledge of history and of social forces believe that voluntary attempts at stabilisation are far better than the alternative.
And David, we cannot wait till the economy improves to build our society. The two are so inextricably intertwined, that any attempt to distinguish between them is bound to lead to false analysis. My point, however, is that if you allow your economy to go to hell in a handbasket, your society will implode! I hope that Barbadians are not too complacently insular, and inward-looking to observe and understand what is going on in the rest of the World.
Free and Fair Elections
(The following one-pager is taken from the U.S. Department of State publication, Principles of Democracy.)
Free and fair elections allow people living in a representative democracy to determine the political makeup and future policy direction of their nation’s government.
• Free and fair elections increase the likelihood of a peaceful transfer of power. They help to ensure that losing candidates will accept the validity of the election’s results and cede power to the new government.
• Elections alone do not assure democracy since dictators can use the resources of the state to tamper with the election process.
• Free and fair elections require:
Legal prohibitions against election fraud – enforceable laws must exist to prevent vote tampering (e.g. double counting, ghost voting).
http://www.america.gov/st/democracyhr-english/2008/May/20080609215618eaifas9.156436e-02.html
MIA has effective said on the news tonight that she is leaving public office. She done.
So Malden. Is that correct or you messing with us.
David can you give us an update?
She Said it Maybe her last address in such a capacity.
@ George Reid
Sir, why don’t you go and look for some wilderness in which to cry nuh? You really expect Bajans to listen to your wise, reasoned plea to remain focused on the real issue at hand when we are presented with such juicy gossip fests?
Did the Bushman not already warn that, our Titanic having already been fatally struck by the iceberg, the ongoing paranoia about exactly who is now at the wheel is completely meaningless and misguided. We should by now be manning the lifeboats and arranging for orderly evacuation….. or as you put it, taking proactive corrective fiscal and structural action instead of waiting until the water swallows us…
But Bajans prefer to stay in their cabins playing strip poker with Mia, Owing and Pain, so George – save your breath….and stop crying in the wilderness….
@Bush Tea,
you is chicken little?
@ Hants
This is not about the sky. The ship is sinking….. LOL
Does anyone see the sense in David thompson flying overseas every week? Why not stay over in teh uS and get the best treatment that our taxpayers money can buy?
The above is one of the chief reasons a faction of the BLP want to get rid of Mia Mottley.
They seem angry that she asked Barbadians to pray for PM Thompson and feel that she should ask who is paying his bills and even ask him to resign
I-Prophet NOT A CENT OF TAXPAYERS MONIES HAVE GONE TOWARDS PRIME MINISTERS MEDICAL BILLS.
When we had the Mascoll/Thompson squabble the people had their say. It was one of the biggest political stories which went on for years.
The Arthur/Mia challenge for leadership is equally a big story which has captured the public’s attention.
We need to get through quickly and get on with the business of governance.
The DLP may have similar issues but at this point it is speculative.
One would hope the DLP has learned from the past. Many of the DLP candidates being bandied around narrowly won their seats and that was with a national swing.
Let us the BLP can resolve this issue quickly and work at healing the fracture.
@Bush Tea | October 16, 2010 at 9:14 PM | @ George Reid
“Sir, why don’t you go and look for some wilderness in which to cry nuh? You really expect Bajans to listen to your wise, reasoned plea to remain focused on the real issue at hand when we are presented with such juicy gossip fests?
Did the Bushman not already warn that, our Titanic having already been fatally struck by the iceberg, the ongoing paranoia about exactly who is now at the wheel is completely meaningless and misguided. We should by now be manning the lifeboats and arranging for orderly evacuation….. or as you put it, taking proactive corrective fiscal and structural action instead of waiting until the water swallows us…
But Bajans prefer to stay in their cabins playing strip poker with Mia, Owing and Pain, so George – save your breath….and stop crying in the wilderness….”
Bushie, I am flattered by your analogy, although i seem to recall that all that John the Baptist got for all his effort was to have his head cut off, after he had suffered a long imprisonment, and handed to a young woman, on a platter as a reward for wukking up in front of a king.
– I hope that all we Bajan young wummen learn sumting from dat, cause a lot uh dem duz sell duh selves short, man! I no a lot uh men an wummen, too, duz sell duh selves to de short man, but dat is uh nedder matta!
BTW, I like your phrase “arranging for orderly evacuation”. A few nights ago I ate too many prunes, and my evacuation was prompt, but very disorderly. Man, the deathboat was filled in no time!
Anyway, Bushie, I’m looking out of a window in my office (or what passes for it) and I can see that another morning has broken, fair and square, so I’m going to get myself ready to go to Bethel Methodist Church to pray with the Statisticians (remember, I was one, once) that they continue to get the numbers right. I know that figures don’t lie, but liars figure, so, truth or lie, I hope that our DMs put on their thinking caps and begin to figure out what is wrong with our economy, and what they must do to correct it.
The only reason that I posted my comment was that my friend Charlie Skeete called me from Washington, DC and asked me why I was not helping the Government to sort out the current problems. I told him that I tried doing that in 1991, and I wrote about it two years ago, remember! But all I got was a lot of enemies, so I gratefully accepted the short man’s offer and got to hell out of Barbados. I told Skeetie that like him, I am over 70, and retired. All I want to do, nowadays, is to compose my reflections, and annoy the hell out of people who don’t like me to tell it like it is. I’m glad to know that you are not one of those!
Do have a good day! I gone.
@Dr R
How did Arthur show decline, did he say no or ignored the offer?
Tell Charlie Skeete to join the BU family and help to educate/enlighten the Bajan blogosphere.
Women like you and I have always made the difference in every election, and starting now – as never before, your voice, the stand you must take and your hope will be the deciding factors in brining about change and in forging a new future for Barbados.
No one is simply asking you to trust in Mia Mottley’s ability to bring change to Barbados but you must trust your ability and know that for generations, women like you and I have been the backbone of this country as mother, wives, caregivers, counsellor while providing unmatched service to Barbados as a support base and a unifying force.
You must be willing to fight for your cause and must kick-down the notion that the only reason you and your daughters cannot become Prime Minister of Barbados, is because they are a woman.
I believe that this is our moment to finally take a stand. To say enough!
This is our moment to create that future that we so desperately want. A future where a woman can become and remain Leader of the Opposition because she is more competent that the five who seek to remove her. A future where a woman can become Prime Minister based on her ability.
We must fight for Barbados to become a place where a woman can aspire to any office based on merit and also to ensure that she will not be remove from office by men who are far less competent than she is.
If we are willing to fight for this cause, if we do this together with courage, passion and faith and hope in what is possible then we will be on the right side of history and as patriotic Barbadians – be successful in brining the change to this country that it needs.
I am asking all women in this country to have faith in our ability to do what must be done to give our country a new start.
This is our moment to join together to forge a better future for our children and our families. We have a chance to make something possible NOW.
Help Mia Mottley transform this country in a fundamental way. If you believe that as women your moment has come. If you believe that this is your opportunity to bring about UNITY; to restore honour, dignity and principle to our politics, If you opposed the corruption mainstream media spoke about recently as regards electoral fraud,
If you believe it is time to change the system that has prevented women from aspiring to high office, If you want to be part of a cause that can bring real change Barbados then you must stand with Mia Mottley against the power-hungry gang of 5, who will fire her tomorrow.
This is your moment.
The change Barbados needs can start with you.
@David | October 17, 2010 at 6:55 AM | @Dr R
“How did Arthur show decline, did he say no or ignored the offer?
Tell Charlie Skeete to join the BU family and help to educate/enlighten the Bajan blogosphere.”
David, I don’t understand your question about the Rhosa. But those Rhosarian years just bubbled along and produced a heady brew, which is now giving the bimmyconomy a severe migrane!
I’ll pass on your message to Charlie Skeete, but I doubt that BU could handle the language in which he describes current policy stances of BOTH political parties. Tony Best does a good job in getting him to keep his sound bites civil.
@Doc R
Sorry about that, did Arthur say no to your offer of assistance or did he ignore the offer?
Ravin’ Craven Raven | asked on October 15, 2010 at 8:54 PM…”Is being blind drunk an illness? Just asking
”
No being blind drunk is not an illness.
But ALCOHOLISM IS AN ILLNESS.
Bajan Panday wrote | October 15, 2010 at 11:39 AM … “Rawle Eastman[sic] is the most respected person in the House and he…has a deep respect for women.”
You like you more Panday that Bajan. You like you forget that Barbados is a real, real small place. Those of us who have know Mr. Eastman since he was in diapers can’t join you in saying that he has a deep respect for women.
He has the ordinary Bajan man’s respect for Bajan women.
Bajan Panday | wrote on October 16, 2010 at 11:24 PM
“The BLP want to get rid of Mia Mottley. ..They seem angry that she asked Barbadians to pray for PM Thompson and feel that she should ask who is paying his bills and even ask him to resign”
In this case the BLP is right. It is a legitimate question to ask who is paying for the PM’s care. High medical bills is the leading cause of personal bankrupcy in the United States. High medical bills can bankrupt even upper middle class American families, once their private insurance coverage maxes out. Why do you think that Mr. Obama has place health care reform so high on his agenda?
I expect that high medical bills can also bankrupt a Bajan Prime Minister.
Legitimate questions for the BLP to ask are:
Who is paying the PM’s bills?
Does he have medical insurance?
If so with which company?
If he has private insurance and it maxes our who will pay the rest of the bills?
Will the people of Barbados be told when the PM’s private insurance (if he has private insurance) maxes out?
Is CLICO health paying some of the bills?
Is CLICO health is a position to pay all the bills?
As a CLICO health policy holder, will there be money left to pay my medical bills if next week I discover that I have an illness as serious as the Prime Ministers?
And what if the PM has no medical insurance? Who then is paying the bills, since by now the bills may well have exceeded $1 million USD.
And no we do not need the leader of the opposition asking us to pray for the PM.
In Barbados we have thousands of pastors and priests who are competent spiritual advisers. Offering spiritual counsel is NOT the role of the leader of the opposition.
The leader of the opposition is supposed to lead us in temporal (not spiritual) matters.
J wrote”Those of us who have know Mr. Eastman since he was in diapers “.
So you know he when he used to live down dey so by the parish church on de opposite side.
Well I did know he too an he was a nice fella an a good son to he mudda so I tink dat he grow up respectin women.
@David | October 17, 2010 at 7:40 PM | @Doc R
“Sorry about that, did Arthur say no to your offer of assistance or did he ignore the offer?”
David, I made a specific proposal to the relevant Ministry offering my assistance to build capacity where I knew it was weak, and in view of my familiarity with the IFIs, I could speed up the process of developing bankable projects. If my proposal had been accepted it could have accelerated the draw down of funds already committed to Barbados.
I guess that it was placed in File 13, since I got no response, which did not really surprise me, having rejected an earlier underture from the RHOSA of becoming one of his miscellaneous consultants who could be terminated at whim. You see, I have always been task oriented, but I know some political agendas can be very diffuse.
So my friend, I find great amusement in the current goings on, and on, and on!!
Dear Mr Owen Arthur,
The parliamentary group of the Barbados Labour Party will meet later today to discuss the leadership of the Opposition in parliament. You as the most senior member of this group must be made aware of certain issues.
(1) George Payne and Ronald Toppin have openly declared that no woman is to hold a superior position over them and hence their attempt to get rid of Miss Mottley as the Leader of the Opposition. In this connection what is Payne and Toppin telling the women of Barbados? Can it be told to our daughters and women-folk that even though they have achieved educationally they must remain subservient ?
(2) There has been malfeasance and mal-administration at the BLP headquarters under the watch of none other than Chairman Payne. The word corruption might be too harsh.
(3) Vote rigging, vote buying have been the norm under the watch of chairman Payne. Mr Arthur, you as Minister in charge of the Electoral and Boundaries Commission have overseen three general elections and insisted that there shall be no election fraud. Can it happen at the BLP and our eyes remain closed?
(4) From the newspaper accounts, the elders have been more than slighted . Is Payne saying that the elderly should have no say in the affairs of the BLP and the country in general? Is Payne reducing the elderly to the garbage pail? These elderly persons have consistently supported the BLP.
(5) The contributions of Payne and Toppin in the House of Assembly have been negligible.
Mr Arthur as the senior statesman of the BLP you must now stand up for what is fair and just.
The Barbadian version of Julius Caesar
When Mia Mottley goes to BLP headquarters today at 10:00 for her trial (having already been convicted and sentenced by the gang of 5) it will be akin to decency, integrity and the future of the BLP, coming face-to-face with electoral fraud, election rigging, blatant disregards for the BLP’s Constitution, corruption and the BLP‘s past.
Unfortunately, on this occasion, the entity that will lose will be the future of the BLP and integrity, since Mia Mottley will be sacked.
Why?
She is unlikely to play ball and will not allow herself to be blackmailed, neither will she negotiate or make a deal for her survival as Political Leader of the BLP and Leader of the Opposition.
The fiasco now unfolding within the BLP therefore seems like a Barbadian version of William Shakespeare’s tragedy” ‘Julius Caesar.’
In the Bajan scenario, the real issue is not leadership but CORRUPTION exposed, shamed and now hostile. The gang of 5 have lost the moral high-ground and are desperately looking for an escape route.
Talk about reviewing Mia Mottley’s leadership, is intended to downplay the overwhelming evidence of corruption and electoral fraud that has been uncovered within the BLP and merely highlights the fact that the gang of 5 has been MIA for the past 3 years. In essence, it is their stewardship their constituents and taxpayers ought to be reviewing.
But as in Julius Caesar, where there were the conspirators, the BLP gang of 5 or the local conspirators have also manufactured a superficial motive for wanting to remove Mia Mottley. They say that it is some letter that is the final straw. Sounds familiar?
In Julius Caesar the conspirators petitioned Caesar to bring back a man who he had banished knowing quite well that Caesar would not agree to such madness. So that when Caesar said “NO,” they immediately drove their daggers in him.
Reluctantly, Brutus is last. At this point, Caesar utters the famous line “Et tu, Brute?” (“And you, Brutus?”, i.e. “You too, Brutus?”).
The stab which Mia Mottley will feel most tomorrow will be that of her Deputy, Dale Marshall, and like Caesar, that will floor her. It is at that point that she is likely to tell herself that she does not want to survive such treachery.
Like the conspirators who said they did it for Rome, the BLP gang of 5 will try to make clear that they committed this act for the BLP and not for their own purposes (lust, greed, ambition, power & wealth)
The Mark Anthony in all this could be Trevor Prescod.
If yesterday‘s Sun on Saturday is anything to go by, we know that already there is a move to expel Pain from the BLP, symbolic of the conspirators being banished from Rome.
With apologies to Gadfly above;
Dear Mr Arthur;
I have admired and looked up to you over most of the years you have spent in public service in Barbados. You were no ordinary parliamentarian or politician, but the very best. Not one of them that went before you could match the totality of your intellect, foresight, capacity for hard work, feeling for the common man, love for Barbados, breath of knowledge, quest for always doing what was right, and prodigious memory.
You have left a legacy of achievements that few can match. But now it appears that, by the actions which seem to be imminent, you will destroy all that in one fell swoop.
Replacing Mia now is not going to result in a BLP victory in the next elections. It is more likely to cause a defection from the BLP of enough supporters to ensure that the BLP will be in the political wilderness for the forseeable future. Do the math.
Replacing Mia now will not help Barbados. All hands are needed on deck to allow us to recover from the effects of this troubled economy and the burdens placed on it by some policies in your very last term of office as well as the additional, largely unnecessary and very significant burdens placed on it by the current administration, albiet in a bad external environment.
The opposition has a role to play in the fight to keep Barbados afloat by keeping the government in check, inter alia. Your expected actions now might ensure that the opposition is so weakened that it cannot effectively play that role. Listen to the Elders and for the next few months or years swallow your pride and work under Mia to heal the BLP and with the Government in whatever way is possible to help to get Barbados back on the proper track.
Failing this your legacy is likely to be ruined irretrievably.
Well MAM has been “offed” and now the faeces will be pulled into the turbine! Who is going to clean it up? This is a moment that calls for the exercise of intestinal and testicular fortitude. In sort, somebody will have to use their guts and balls!
The BLP needs no advice from ac
The BLP RAN THIS COUNTRY WELL
BRINGING BARBADOS FROM THE DEPTHS OF DESPAIR IN 1994.
JOBS NO1 WAS JOBS
and unemployment was brought down to 6 % BY THE BLP even with imported labour.
IS BARBADOS BETTER OFF NOW THAN PRE 2008 ?
HAS THE COST OF LIVING GONE UP OR DOWN.
HAVE THE FOREIGN RESERVES GONE UP OR DOWN ?
None of wunna DLP sympathisers /Owen Bashers cannot be comfortable answering these questions so go ahead and attack me -the person me
KISSMYA’I LOVE OWEN SEYMOUR ARTHUR’ MCCLEAN