Prime Minister Fruendel Stuart Biding His Time

Prime Minister Freundel Stuart

Prime Minister Freundel Stuart

JORDAN: So the 11 MPs were eager to meet with the Prime Minister simply to have a discussion?

SINCKLER: Well, you say eager; I think some of us wanted to meet.

A question posed to Minister Chris Sinckler in the Big Interview  by former Editor in Chief Kaymar Jordan (18.12.2012)

BU is reluctant to ‘sully’ its blog offering during the Yuletide season with content of a political flavour. However, we have been enticed to compromise our position as a result of Prime Minister Stuart’s weekend pronouncement. He stated that he saw no evidence of a coup and therefore his promise to ‘chop’ off’ the head or heads of those in the vanguard of the Eager 11 (E11) assault is not required. In the minds of many Barbadians Stuart’s inaction to deal with the E11 affair agrees with a widely held view that he is not a leader.

Some who read the tea leaves maybe intrigued that Prime Minister Stuart waited almost one year to the day to make a decisive statement about the E11 affair. Perhaps the Prime Minister is readying the party for election battle by seeking to deflate this issue which is sure to raise its head on the election platform. Was he advised by Hartley Henry to be so bold as to address the issue? Perhaps Stuart appreciates the sandy political turf he will have to trod shortly and the appearance of a cohesive and united team more favourable weighs the scale then giving political fodder to the Opposition which ‘chopping of a head or heads” may cause. It is accepted that Prime Minister Stuart CANNOT ‘touch’ Minister Sinckler who CADRES has fingered as the most popular political personage in Barbados after Owen Arthur and Mia Mottley.

If Stuart has delayed disciplinary action because he believes it will disadvantage the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) with a general election on the horizon – political pundits have revised the election date to 12 February 2013 –  can one say Stuart has compromised on the leadership position necessary to grow his stature as a fearless leader? Our history shows that Barbadians have an affinity for Prime Ministers who are not afraid to figuratively crush some political heads.

Stuart’s defenders may hasten to suggest that to project an image of DLP togetherness on the eve of a general election is a commonsense strategy. To speak to the issue now, Stuart has allowed the longest possible period to elapse to benefit from the 9-day memory of Barbadians to fully set.

There will also be the reference to the Mia Owen conflict to balance the argument. Arthur kicked Mia to the political curb but she has obviously retreated and decided to line up behind the party cause to ensure her political relevance. In the post Mia Arthur conflict he gets a few points for effectively stomping on the head of a strong challenger. Although the BLP platform cannot speak directly to this Arthur win, on every occasion Mia and Owen shares political space it will subliminally register in the minds of a politically savvy public that Arthur is the undisputed leader of the BLP.

Yes Mr. Prime Minister, it is the Yuletide Season but we are watching you!

0 responses to “Prime Minister Fruendel Stuart Biding His Time

  1. Fooled by David | December 22, 2012 at 9:45 PM |
    Carson go do Accra work before befor e Jon or Isola drag you over the coals again. Maybe you will catch the people stealing from the storerooms instead of here talking shite.
    …………………………………………………………………………
    Wait ! You like ya behind time, there seems to be a vacancy at Accra for a Stores Manager, compliments of Bin Laden.

    Like

  2. Carson C. Cadogan

    observing

    “Not “hold the course” and “everything will be ok” or “the strategy is working.” ”

    No doubt what will work for you and the BLP is:

    Sell the water authority
    Sell the ncc
    Sell the airport
    Sell the seaport
    Sell the transport board
    Sell the ministry of education
    Sell the ministry of health
    Sell the sanitation authority
    Sell the east coast
    Sell the all the land in center of the island
    Sell the air outside

    ………….and we will be home free.
    Until the next recession.
    What will we sell then?
    You?

    Like

  3. Carson C. Cadogan

    Did I mention send home 10,000 public workers?

    Like

  4. Carson C. Cadogan

    DAVID

    so you have started deleting my comments again!!!

    My two earlier comments are now gone.

    You are bending over backwards to protect your friends? Well, well, well, what is the difference betwenn you and the nation newspaper?

    Like

  5. Carson C. Cadogan

    DAVID

    “Yes we know, BU is not a court of law BUT an online medium which allows the ordinary to give vent to concerns”

    Not a true statement!!!!!!

    When the comments are uncomfortable to your friends, you delete them.

    Just like you are doing with a lot of my comments.

    Like

  6. Carson C. Cadogan

    DAVID

    You deleted the comments again.

    Like

  7. Carson C. Cadogan

    Dont worry I have them saved for future use.

    Like

  8. Carson C. Cadogan

    Adrian you are need in England.

    Like

  9. Carson C. Cadogan

    ‘The rating agencies have been the all-purpose bogeymen for the crisis’
    guardian.co.uk, Monday 17 December 2012 15.00 GMT

    William J Harrington was a senior analyst at Moody’s. Whether you’re an insider yourself or just want to know more after reading this rare interview, he’s here to answer your questions

    A board in Tokyo tracks the Japanese yen’s exchange rate against the US dollar after a downgrade of Spain’s credit rating by Moody’s.

    When the banking blog asks insiders who they blame for the financial crisis, most say: the rating agencies. It was the rating agencies that assigned super safe (“triple A”) ratings to complex financial instruments. When these blew up, the agencies accepted no responsibility, claiming they had merely been expressing “opinions”.

    William J Harrington was a senior analyst at rating agency Moody’s between 1999 and 2010 in New York. Since then he has been campaigning for reform and drawing attention to ongoing problems with ratings. Bill is coming into the comment threads below to answer your questions and discuss his views.

    It’s really worth reading his testimony in full here.

    Some of Bill’s quotes hint in one sentence at a whole universe of dysfunction: “In my days it was individual managers [at Moody's] who set the rules on how to interact with the bankers: for instance whether we could scream back at them (we could not).” And: “I knew rating agencies were seen in the industry as losers and ‘also-rans’. I didn’t care. I didn’t go to conferences, to industry parties… The reality is rating agencies attract rather different kinds of people.”

    The most shocking thing, at least for me, was this:

    “The CEO of Moody’s in the runup to the fiasco in 2008 is now… still the CEO of Moody’s. Last year his compensation was $6m, in line with his five-year average. Moody’s has never had a losing quarter. This is why analysts who follow Moody’s for investors really like Moody’s. Moody’s always makes a profit.”

    Bill says he has asked people at Moody’s why those responsible weren’t fired. “That would be an admission of liability, I was told. Worse, precisely the managers responsible for the instruments that blew up have been rewarded and promoted. I don’t believe in conspiracies but here you really have a small cabal of people doing this.”

    Free market theory predicts that when market players perform as badly as the rating agencies have, new companies will see an opportunity. This has hardly happened with the market for rating agencies. Bill: “Rating agencies form an oligopoly, with Moody’s, Fitch and S&P controlling 97% of the market between them. If there were many significant rating agencies of varying sizes and ownership structures rather than three indistinguishable large ones, then if a few changed their approach it would be hard for the rest to simply continue to go along for the ride. Currently, this is not a self-correcting system.”

    But why don’t other players in finance demand better rating agencies? After two decades at the top of his profession, Bill offers this bleak assessment:

    “The rating agencies are such small entities in such a huge industry. They are like the Panama canal. Crucial but very small. Worldwide, the nine big registered rating agencies have less than 4,000 junior and senior analysts working for them, combined across all activities. JP Morgan alone employs a quarter of a million people. This state of affairs seems to suit the big players well. The rating agencies are one moving piece in the machine that they can push around.

    “The rating agencies have been the all-purpose bogeymen for the crisis. They bear a heavy responsibility, absolutely, but this exclusive focus obscures how the problems are embedded in the whole system: the big banks, accountancy firms, financial law firms, investment firms, regulators, the financial press… The rating agencies have done us a disservice by allowing so much of the blame to rest on them. They are effectively protecting these other players – who seem quite happy with this arrangement. Meanwhile people at rating agencies go: “just blame us, we’re used to it.”

    It’s very rare for a former rating agency employee to speak out like Bill does: “I didn’t take ‘a package’. If I had I might have gotten a year’s salary – but I’d have to sign a ‘non-disparagement’ clause which meant that I’d remain silent about what I saw.”

    There is much more good stuff in the full interview, about how the rating process actually works, how rating agencies reward their employees in a fundamentally different way from other areas in finance, and what it’s been like for Bill to be gay in finance.

    Especially if you’re considering leaving a comment below, please read the full text first. As for those comments, it would be really great if other (former) rating agency employees would come forward. Equally interesting would be to hear from insiders across the financial industry about their experiences with the rating agencies. At the end of the full text Bill makes two alarming points about ongoing problems with ABSs. What do other insiders think?

    As for financial outsiders: this is your chance. Bill had a ring seat during the buildup, climax and aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis. A firm believer in disseminating information and insight about finance to as large an audience as possible, he is eager to take your questions, also those about finance generally.

    • This banking blog features interviews with insiders across the industry. Here is a guide to help you find your way.

    One other rating agency employee has spoken to the blog: “Every time I read about a new financial product, I think: ‘Uh-oh’.”

    Another voice in finance who is gay: “When I came out, my boss was really supportive and so were my colleagues. There has been only one idiot so far.”

    Like

  10. Carson C. Cadogan

    Ex-Moody’s analyst: ‘By 2006 it was toxic everywhere’

    William J Harrington talks to Joris about what he loved and hated about the rating agency, and why the system broke down
    Share33

    inShare.2
    Email

    Joris Luyendijk

    guardian.co.uk, Monday 17 December 2012 15.00 GMT

    William J Harrington was a senior analyst at the rating agency Moody’s between 1999 and 2010 in New York. Since then he has been campaigning for reform and drawing attention to ongoing problems with ratings. Bill is coming into the comment threads here to answer your questions and discuss his views.

    “The rating agencies have been the all-purpose bogeymen for the crisis. They bear a heavy responsibility, absolutely, but this exclusive focus obscures how the problems are embedded in the whole system: the big banks, accountancy firms, financial law firms, investment firms, regulators, the financial press. The rating agencies have done us a disservice by allowing so much of the blame to rest on them. They are effectively protecting these other players – who seem quite happy with this arrangement. Meanwhile, people at rating agencies say: ‘Just blame us, we’re used to it.’

    “The rating agencies are such small entities in such a huge industry. They are like the Panama canal. Crucial but very small. Worldwide the nine big registered rating agencies have less than 4,000 junior and senior analysts working for them, combined across all activities. JP Morgan alone employs a quarter of a million people. Again, this state of affairs seems to suit the big players well. The rating agencies are one moving piece in the machine that they can push around.

    “An added problem is that rating agencies form an oligopoly, with Moody’s, Fitch and S&P [Standard and Poor's] controlling 97% of the market between them. If there were many significant rating agencies of varying sizes and ownership structures rather than three indistinguishable large ones, then if a few changed their approach it would be hard for the rest to simply continue to go along for the ride. Currently, this is not a self-correcting system.

    “The CEO of Moody’s in the run-up to the fiasco in 2008 is now … still the CEO of Moody’s. Last year his compensation was $6m, in line with his five-year average. Rating agencies make so much money … Moody’s has never had a losing quarter. This is why analysts who follow Moody’s for investors really like Moody’s. Moody’s always makes a profit.

    “I have asked people at Moody’s: why didn’t you fire those responsible? But that would be an admission of liability, I was told. Worse, precisely the managers responsible for the instruments that blew up have been rewarded and promoted. I don’t believe in conspiracies but here you really have a small cabal of people doing this.

    “The cliched idea about rating agencies seems to go like this: a deal to rate a complex financial instrument came in, we stamped it triple A and collected our check. This is a canard. People were working all day on these things, and in the end there would be a committee vote on whether to extend a triple A rating.

    “How it works: you have junior analysts, senior analysts and management. Together we work through the instrument, running our models and finding out exactly how it is designed. It is a constant collaborative process between junior and senior analysts and management at Moody’s, plus the bankers. At the end there would be a committee meeting on the basis of one man, one vote: juniors, seniors and management were ostensibly all equal. I loved that system, to go into committee and cast your vote. My family is from New England, where the town hall meeting was invented. It’s a beautiful tradition to stand before your peers and express yourself in this way.

    “Rating agencies are powerful. Without that AAA rating the bank cannot sell the instrument. Even if we’d delay our rating by a few days because of further questions, the bank would look bad, having to explain the delay to their clients. So the goal was for bankers to improve the instrument in such a way that our models would record AAA results and we could proceed to committee to vote.

    “Over time this system broke down. Management began to promote those analysts who kept the machine running, who didn’t push back against bankers. At the same time they hired more and more junior analysts who were cheaper. These junior analysts were impressive in their own right, just probably too inexperienced by, say, 10 years.

    “More and more it was the bankers who drove the process. They became bolder, as they discovered that they’d get their rating without having to improve an instrument. In 2004 you could still talk back and stop a deal. That was gone by 2006. It became: work your tail off, and at some point management would say, ‘Time’s up, let’s convene in a committee and we’ll all vote “yes”‘. Issues brought up by analysts in committee would be dismissed, or management would park them, saying ‘Let’s make a note of that’. Or: ‘I am glad you’re raising it’ – nothing would happen. You knew that while management talked the talk in the committees and big group meetings, they would have agreed to other things with the bankers earlier. Again, it was never rubber-stamping. Most analysts did not go on autopilot. It was more subtle.

    “By 2006, I concluded that the committee process for these complex instruments had irredeemably broken down. I moved full time to a derivative sub-sector where I still felt it was possible to make committees work.

    This is why it’s easy for me to talk about all this. Also, when I walked out in 2010 after having wound down my responsibilities I didn’t take a “package”. If I had I might have gotten a year’s salary – but I’d have to sign a ‘non-disparagement’ clause which meant that I’d remain silent about what I saw. By the way, everything I am writing about now, and everything I am telling you, I raised all of that when at Moody’s. I never leaked anything to the Wall Street Journal. I could have. But I never did.

    “In my days it was individual managers who set the rules of how to interact with the bankers: for instance whether we could scream back at them (we could not). Management is the big problem, bankers or no bankers. And there is no way to get around management. There is no structure, no attempt to evaluate committee proceedings based on analyst contribution over time. Moreover, managers have great discretion to reverse committee outcomes by essentially calling a foul and insisting on a do-over.

    “In response to the crisis Moody’s has changed its committee format somewhat. These days junior rating analysts vote first, to prevent them from taking their cues from their superiors. This looks like a solution. But senior managers can send all sorts of non-verbal signals. Junior and senior analysts take their lead from managers who oversee them both in committee and in all other matters as well, for instance compensation and promotion. If management makes it clear there is no downside for letting something go, for overlooking potential problems in an instrument … To be sure, every analyst is individually responsible for their votes no matter how toxic the environment. No one is forced to work at Moody’s.

    “Rating agencies work differently from banks, law and accountancy firms. These are often solo practices where small groups of people form teams which work on the premise that you eat what you kill – bring in a lot of business and you make a lot of money. Then within the team there’s a star system where some players get far more than others.

    “Moody’s is different. Our department’s revenues fed into one big pot, together with those from other activities – Moody’s rates corporations, countries, derivatives and many other things. Moody’s Corp, the ultimate parent, earned profit margins of 90% from our group.

    Another difference with law, investment banks and accountancy is that teams there are often poached wholesale by competitors. That would never happen in rating agencies. You just wouldn’t jump ship and join Fitch. By the way, our management would always make fun of Fitch, as in: that Mickey Mouse shop, they’ll rate anything.

    “I trained as an economist and worked for Merrill Lynch but I knew that was a training ground. A rating agency suited me much better. I liked being able to turn off work at night. I liked working with lots of different banks, and was happy to argue with bankers. I liked the systemic thinking that rating requires, looking at lots of variables, and I am comfortable telling people when there’s something I don’t understand. I never sought a management role, I didn’t like the way they threw their weight around in committee.

    “I knew rating agencies were seen in the industry as losers and also-rans. I didn’t care. I didn’t go to conferences, to industry parties. The reality is they attract rather different kinds of people. Junior and senior analysts alike were exceptionally intelligent, many with PhDs.

    “Even when the environment turned toxic in 2006, I stayed and accepted that I might be fired for doing so or that I might feel obligated to resign – by then it was toxic everywhere. I expected the financial system to fall apart, it was inevitable.

    “In investment banks people always seem to want more, more, more. The reward system is just so … straight. You see people get old before their time because their primary concern seems to be find the next deal. They seem to lose everything that makes them unique. And they have this enormous sense of self-importance. Moody’s really suited me, it clicked.

    “In cross-industry surveys Moody’s has received a 100% score as a good place for gay people to work. People would sometimes ask, coming into Moody’s: ‘Why is it so gay here?’

    “I suppose that once a place establishes itself as gay-friendly, others will gravitate towards it. I do suspect some of the most toxic managers at Moody’s liked to hire beaten-up people who may have felt they had few options – getting people indebted to them by not being homophobic.

    “Being gay in finance has left an important stamp on my life. I remember when I was interning at Salomon Brothers – in those days a venerable firm. They offered me a job and I went around introducing myself to people on the trading floor, as was the protocol. At one point a trader looked at me and said: “Salomon Brothers is great. Unless you’re a faggot. I hate faggots.”

    “I had trained myself not to flinch since I was 10, so I didn’t. It was horrible. This was 1991. Nobody was out on the floor and I wanted to come out at my own speed without having to lie. I never went along to a strip club, never pretended to have a girlfriend. I believe discrimination blocked me at Merrill as well although I started coming out anyway and some people responded positively. Being openly gay was not an issue at Moody’s.

    “I don’t want to reveal my pay at Moody’s; these things are private. I will say that I was one of the two top analyst earners worldwide by 2004-2005. But I made less in salary and bonus than Goldman Sachs whistleblower Greg Smith’s $500,000. Typically compensation was 60% salary, 40% bonus – with that bonus calculated primarily on the basis of the whole firm’s performance and secondarily on our own department’s.

    “One misunderstanding is that the problems that caused the crisis are no longer with us. But banks post complex financial instruments as collateral to central banks. These still follow the ratings to assess the value of these instruments. This means that re-evaluating those ratings and downgrading them will have serious knock-on effects on the capital base and hence the financial health of banks.

    “Another misunderstanding is that we can start assigning triple A-rated asset-backed securities (ABS) again. There are problems baked into ABSs, in particular the derivative contracts underpinning them. The problem is what happens with the ABS when the bank counter-party for a derivative hedge becomes insolvent. Last, rating agencies make bailouts more likely by factoring open-ended taxpayer support into bank ratings.

    “I will be happy to explain in more detail in the comments section.”

    Like

  11. most people are aware that the downgrade that barbados is getting can also be linked to high borrowing by the BLP followed and made worse by the stagnation in the world economy and a lack lustre tourism which was pivotal in driving the barbados economy over the past years. the blp yardflows would want people to belive that this problem started with the dlp but this problem can be traced back to the blp who had no vision of producing an economy built on viability which could sustain itself in hard economic times.

    Like

  12. Carson C. Cadogan

    Read the article by William J Harrington and you would see how moody operates.

    But sadly we have so little faith in our selves and what we do.

    Like

  13. Carson C. Cadogan

    We wronly believe we need people like ADRIAN LOVERIDGE to tell us what to do.

    Some of these people cant even run their own homes!!!!!

    Like

  14. millertheanunnaki

    @ Carson C. Cadogan | December 22, 2012 at 1:06 PM |

    We notice your persistent references to Adrian’s ethnicity and place of birth.
    These racist allusions will be taken into account in another dimension if you seek to visit that country you constantly denigrate. The term ‘persona non grata’ would take on new meaning to you.
    This is the same ‘white’ country you disparage and condemn along with its people and which is the source of Barbados’ major tourist arrivals.
    If you agree with this fact, could you then explain how in the light of the poor and gloomy economic prognosis for the UK the DLP tourism gurus and economic magicians can hinge this country’s economic survival on a bright and beautiful winter tourist season? Where will these tourists come from? The Diaspora in the USA staying at family and friends?

    Is it logical, therefore, to say: One down (S&P), Two down (Moody’s) and Three (IMF aka Devaluation) to go?

    If you think that this two bit governor of a central bank that would soon be closing can go around embarrassing the head of one of the largest international financial institutions and get away with no consequences you better think again. There is nothing more vindictive than a French woman’s scorned. Not even an e-mail begging for forgiveness but still argumentative would do the trick.
    Like you CCC, little black boys need to know your uppity racist place.
    Stop your racist crap or else!
    Heed the miller’s advice and don’t do like your boss man and play ‘powful foolish’. If he had called the elections before May 2012 he would be sitting tight, tight just doing the bidding of his IMF masters instead of leaving it up to the BLP.

    Like

  15. moody or not
    standard or poor
    THE DLP GOVERNMENT IS SHIT
    TIME TO GET RID OF IT

    Like

  16. I don’t know if I dreamt it but I seem to remember that the Minister of Finance saying that Standard & Poors got it wrong when they downgraded Barbados. My memory is not what it used to be but I recall that he was relying on the fact that Moody’s did not similarly downgrade Barbados as a sign that S & P got it wrong.

    Does anybody have a similar recollection?

    Like

  17. Carson C. Cadogan

    millertheanunnaki | December 23, 2012 at 10:21 AM |

    Right on cue.
    I was wondering what was taking you so long.

    Like

  18. Carson C. Cadogan

    millertheanunnaki | December 23, 2012 at 10:21 AM |

    Do you remember a Barbados Labour Party Minister telling ADRIAN LOVERIDGE THAT HE WAS NOT INDIGENOUS ENOUGH TO SPEAK ON TOURISM MATTERS?

    And with that he was removed from a post or whatever that he held?

    I await your answer.

    Like

  19. Carson C. Cadogan

    millertheanunnaki | December 23, 2012 at 10:21 AM

    Instead of rushing to ADRIAN LOVERIDGE defence you ought to apologise to the person whose car seats you cut up.

    Like

  20. Carson C. Cadogan

    millertheanunnaki | December 23, 2012 at 10:21 AM

    Brown nosers like you are pretty dangerous people.

    Like

  21. Carson C. Cadogan

    millertheanunnaki(may2012)

    “The term ‘persona non grata’ would take on new meaning to you.”

    We will see, I am off to england in the first week of the new year, I will bring back a little gift for you.

    Like

  22. Carson

    Stop getting personal and nasty, and deal with the issues. I know that you are capable of being better than that. Leave that abusive behaviour for people with lesser intellect.

    Like

  23. @Caswell

    Don’t you get it? It is the silly season and the hacks must earn their supper.

    BU has a simple rule, commenters who post under their real names will be protected by BU from personal attacks.

    Next time we will go one step further than to delete comments.

    Like

  24. Carson C. Cadogan

    DAVID

    What do you call a personal attack?

    Telling an englishman to go back to england and help his country?
    They need his help.
    He is just being given some good advice or is it only him who can give advice?

    Like

  25. Carson C. Cadogan

    We are constantly being told by the Barbados Labour Party that the country is in bad shape.

    Anyone been to Pricemart this morning?

    There was also fighting at Popular discounts supermarket in Spooners Hill this morning, wall to wall people.

    Like

  26. In a Politico article Members of the House of Representatives in the USA tell rating agencies to get lost because they threatened to down grade USA if it goes over the fiscal cliff.
    Now that is what a superpower can do.
    Little Barbados would have to accept what they say and just get on with doing what is right.
    It must be noted that the Moody’s spokesperson Mr.Freedman said that some of Owens proposals point in the right direction in the short term but some would lead to fiscal deterioration. Those measures pointing in the right direction is the privatization of the transport Board, health and education.

    He came in 1994 where he borrowed in the short term to sustain a car in every garage and massive houses in a construction boom now in the long term we are in deep trouble.
    The BLP supporters can take no comfort in this downgrade because if Owen wins he cannot do the things he said will be done like give the Hotel sector $500 million unless sending home many public servants and the privatization o many social services. Social unrest will follow.

    So PM Stuart just like the Americans just tell Moody’ to get lost.

    Like

  27. So Mr CARSON

    People fighting at Pricemart is an indication of what ???

    JUST ASKING

    Like

  28. Observing(...)

    @clone
    What’s the point u r making?

    @carson
    Back to ya old self!

    Economic indicator = # people fighting in Pricesmart. Priceless!

    Do you have stats on that for the last 3-4 years??

    Observing

    Like

  29. Carson C. Cadogan

    just asking

    “People fighting at Pricemart is an indication of what ???”

    Who was it that said that people were fighting at Pricemart?.

    Like

  30. Observing(...)

    @carson
    Oh shoot, you are correct. That makes two indicators.
    # people in Pricesmart and
    # people shopping at Popular.

    Now, if we divide the distance from “wall to wall” by the number of people, we have a adequate metric of people per cubic centimeter. Just need to extrapolate that now to find nominal GDP input and gross economic stimulation.

    Well done! Who needs Moody’s or S and P??

    Just observing

    Like

  31. I am all in favour of FOI and had hoped that this Gov’t would introduce some sort of legislation governing the public’s right to Information during its term in Office. The attached story from the Toronto Star is a cautionary tale of a jurisdiction where there are laws providing for “Access to Information” yet the reporter seeking it is thwarted at every turn in his quest. Particularly interesting is his recounting a discussion with the Premier of Ontario who as Leader of the Opposition was all in favour of providing easy access to Information but whose Gov’t now makes things more difficult.

    Ancient proverb: “Be careful of what you wish for, you might get it”

    http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/1305751–culture-of-secrecy-keeping-canadians-in-the-dark

    Like

  32. Carson C. Cadogan

    observing

    Explain something to me “observing”,,the thousands upon thousands of shoppers who took up shopping carts and entered Pricemart, took down many items from their shelves spaces filled two and three carts, did they just walk out of Pricemart without paying?

    Was yesterday “free day” at Pricemart? No type of money changed hands? I am sure that Pricemart made millions in sales yesterday. Your Barbados Labour Party goes around telling all who would listen that there is no money. Where did all this money to fill Pricemart coffers come from?

    A similar situation at Big B supermarket as well, one could hardly get through the door at Big B supermarket, but I guess acordding to you and the Barbados Labour Party Big B had a “free giveaway day” yesterday as well. Also Trimart supermarket.

    I must say that we seem to have a wonderful Private sector. All of this freeness they are giving us poor Bajans who have no money if we are to believe you and the Barbados Labour Party.

    Like

  33. Observing(...)

    @carson
    They paid for their goods. It was not free day. They had money because salaries were paid. It’s christmas. This is the norm.

    Now, let’s see how people cope in January. Let’s see how much interest our grandchildren will have to pay back for the money borrowed to pay salaries. Let’s see how many more layoffs come in the same said private sector, since the xmas is a spike and not consistent business revenue. Let’s see how far those same salaries go with zero wage increases while everything else does. Let’s see how much more we have to pay to borrow because of the downgrade. Let’s see if the tourisses spend, if or when they come. Let’s resume this discussion after Governor Worrell gives his report in January. If he decides to do so before elections that is.

    Just observing

    Like

  34. Caswell Franklyn

    Observing

    Could you tell Carson that many of those shoppers used credit cards.

    Sent from my iPad

    Like

  35. Observing(...)

    @caswell
    True thing! Don’t forget a bounced check here and there! Or the xmas loan from the credit union :)

    Like

  36. Carson C. Cadogan

    “Could you tell Carson that many of those shoppers used credit cards.”

    So when you use credit cards you dont have to pay off balances? Or you use credit cards for free?

    Then send me a few hundred of those credit cards!

    Like

  37. Carson C. Cadogan

    observing

    “They had money because salaries were paid. It’s christmas.”

    Ok, I didnt know that workers only get salaries at Christmas time.

    Silly me.

    Like

  38. Carson C. Cadogan

    “Or the xmas loan from the credit union ”

    Ok again, you dont have to repay loans in Barbados. You are real smart, when I grow up I want to be just like you.

    Like

  39. Carson C. Cadogan

    observing

    Have you been to SuperCenter Supermarket in warrens today?.

    Thousands upon thousands shopping there. But as you and the Barbados Labour Party would have us believe, all shopping for FREE, FREE i tell you.

    Like

  40. Carson C. Cadogan

    Anyway, Let me go here and see what foolishness ADRIAN LOVERIDGE TALKING ABOUT NOW.

    Like

  41. I did not know people were still talking about the EAGER 11 AND THEIR CHICKEN COUP

    Like

  42. @David

    I have been trying to cut and paste into this box, i though u could have done that and if yes why am i not successful?

    Like

  43. @david

    I have been trying to cut and paste a comment here and it is not allowing me to do so.

    Like

  44. @To the point

    Yes you should be able to paste ‘text’ plain or in HTML format into the comment box. If it is not working for you suggest you switch out the Commodore 64 :-).

    Like

  45. Pingback: Rihanna y Chris Brown vistos en el partido de los Knicks vs Lakers hoy. - Justin bieber - One Direction - Rihanna

Post a comment and join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s