Government Needs to Protect Small Businesses

Adrian Loveridge - Owner of Peach & Quiet Hotel

Adrian Loveridge – Owner of Peach & Quiet Hotel

Perhaps more than many, I can empathise with individuals who have recently seen their business either fail or brought dangerously close to insolvency. In 47 years it has happened to me twice and in both cases, they were largely external forces which caused near personal financial catastrophe.

Of course, it is easy to attribute the blame to others but in my case, I can unequivocally state that both near failures, which occurred years apart, were largely caused by strike action in the United Kingdom. Both involving the National Union of Seaman. Personally witnessing bus loads, of what can only be described as pickaxe wielding thugs, destroying property and intimidating ordinary people simply wanting to go about everyday work and operating their businesses.

More than a decade later, it was the same union, blockading the English channel ports, which prevented literally thousands of our booked holidaymakers taking their hard earned trips.

Unless you have been a small entrepreneur and fully understand the work, sacrifice and dedication it takes to grow and nurture a business from nothing, it might be difficult to comprehend the feeling of sheer devastation you experience, when all those efforts unfold and collapse in front of you.

When we moved to Barbados, some twenty five years ago, and literally put our life savings into purchasing a derelict hotel, we were starting all over again. Not surprising, the local banks we approached were not overly helpful, regularly quoting those seemingly worldly phrases like – we were ‘undercapitalised’ or ‘over trading’. Little did we know then, that these ‘pearls of wisdom’ would come back and haunt the many supposedly ‘responsible’ financial institutions, globally, just years later.

In those early days, understandably, very few suppliers were prepared to extend us credit, and we will be eternally grateful to the handful who took the risk. In hindsight, the limited access to borrowing and credit was probably the best thing that happened to us. Growth of the business and enhancement of plant was funded by positive cashflow, which left us entirely debt free.

Therefore, while I have absolute sympathy for those enterprises which have faced critical financial challenges recently, you are forced to ask if Government is now operating a two tier system of collecting taxes, when a relatively small company can amass outstanding debts of close to a reported $10 million, across four Government agencies.

Something has to be fundamentally wrong.

Our own experiences substantiate this inequity, after finally receiving partial payment of outstanding VAT refunds overdue for as long as three years and seven months.

Clearly any administration has to adopt a balancing act of trying to create a climate where enterprises are encouraged to grow and help soak up unemployment. But at the same time, they should not escape their regulatory responsibility by allowing selected corporate entities to avoid or even evade paying taxes for long periods of time. Ultimately, the businesses which are playing by the rules, despite all the adverse trading conditions, have to pick up any deficit.

0 responses to “Government Needs to Protect Small Businesses

  1. @ PDC

    “minus the Barbadian’s contribution to running the schemes encompassing the banks, credit unions etc.”

    Barbadians will contribute to the fund to get free money from these financial institutions, but will not contribute to the provision of goods and services through taxation?


  2. Inkwell……… are too much……….


  3. David wrote “is ok to be overseas and make noises, it is another to be in Barbados facing the music.”

    Are you saying that we overseas hyphenated Bajans should keep quiet ?

    Just so you know some of us more affected by what is happening in Barbados than what is happening where we currently live.


  4. Carson C. Cadogan

    off topic

    Look how England wants to help us.

    Cameron wants to help build jails to repatriate foreign inmates

    THE British Government is to fund a prisonbuilding programme in poor countries, including Jamaica, in order to get more foreign inmates out of the UK, Prime Minister David Cameron announced late last week.

    Read more:


  5. @Hants

    No and you know it.


  6. @ David
    Bushie can understand the newbies entertaining “serious” discussion with PDC….but Cuhdear man…you must know better… :)

    @ Inkwell
    Thanks man!
    You explanation of the PDC position is even clearer this time around…
    After the PDC went quiet on BU, Bushie was thinking that Adamson had at last got the correct dosage of his medication sorted out…..
    Perhaps not.

    @ PDC
    One thing that Is of note is how much closer your policies have become to the other two main political parties. LOL, unfortunately it is not that yours have gotten any better…
    …shiite man, Arthur and Sinclair don’t sound any more rational than you do…

    ….anyone heard Peter Wickham defending his gay agenda today on brass bowls…. sorry – Brass Tacks? ….easily the single most embarassingly disgusting episode on any public radio in Bushie’s personal experience.
    StarCom should be ashamed.


  7. Carson…………..look at the bright side, the taxpayers will not have to spend money to build a new jail for all the corrupt lawyers and politicians in Bim when they finally have to pay, they will fit quite nicely into a new prison built by the British, with no VECO scandal attached………….how does that make you feel? you can go visit some of your current masters in the new prison when Karma catches up with them.


  8. Bushie……………stop, i can’t breathe………


  9. Yes, that will be done – to some extent – and we will also be taking in money from the National Currency Board (proposed) – which will be the leading financial institution coming under the schemes – money will also come from the Central Bank of Barbados, finance houses etc as well as from the peripheral financial system.

    However, savings will be liabilities (as they are in this financial accountng system) to the financial institutions!! But given that they are represented by money that will go back out of the schemes they must be properly managed against the expected number of transfers (withdrawals) by the financial institutions from out of them to savers. Good Deposits/liabilities ratios, among others, will be maintained within the schemes. But the overall idea is that monies going out will represent future streams of saved income, payments, and transfers vice-a-versa, under this current financial system in Barbados or any other.

    Another point to consider is that persons saving under these schemes will be made to contribute towards the cost of managing and maintaining their accounts in the schemes and therefore savers will be faced with savings costs to their saved remunerations and faced with the prospects of real declining savings from within (this already happens to many savers in the financial system in Barbados), or faced with the prospects of real declining savings/much non-saving from the point of view of the level at which the real actual cost of use of money has reached in the country.

    Well Well, you must recognize that a political economy and services industry sectors in which the amount of gross incomes, payment and transfers remunerated to individuals and entities is nearly always the function of the extent of use of money in the monetary system and the cost of use of money, and not the other around – the size of the expenditure (1.8 billion ) will not determine the amount of money in your scenario, from such an arbitrary perspective – you have to say what is the imagined number related to the variable: currency with the public – we are not totally clear what your assumptions are in this regard – suffice it to say that the 1.8 billion figure ought to have been your conclusion, not your premise and the figure for the currency with the public your premise, and suffice it to say that income, payments and transfers (nominal) would total near the same amount as your expenditure figure.

    However, we therefore cannot really apply this aspect of the model, that of making sure that individuals and other entities are rewarded based on previous contributions to national incomes, payments and transfers – from out of the schemes. What would be your figure for the previous year’s remunerations?? 1.5 billion? 1.6 billion?? For your information though whereas the model rewards individuals for gross income, payments, transfers – net the costs for helping run the schemes, for businesses including government businesses, it is their net income positions – minus their contributions to running the scheme. In your scenario what imaginary number would you assign to businesses in your scenario if you had to??

    Is the 900 k, real money in your scenario or an assumption of an inflated number deposit? Why we ask this question is from the point of view that deposits and so-called loans within the real financial system in Barbados are totally inflated with much of the same monies being deposited or so-called loaned countless times.

    Finally, Well Well, in your scenario there is a false assumption that we are not going to abolish so-called money debt, which, however, we will do under the schemes (We are not involving remuneration debt though – it is impossible to do so).



  10. @Inkwell
    Gotta change my underwears.
    Jesus man Lafff!!! I cudda ded.


  11. “money will also come from the Central Bank of Barbados, finance houses etc as well as from the peripheral financial system”.

    PDC……………you do realize that the Central Bank of Barbados is guided by banking rules and regulations coming out of Europe and North America??, how do you plan to follow their guidelines and still create a new monetary system without getting rid of the Central Bank?? appears you still want to keep the bank, but you cannot do so unless you follow foreign banking rules and regulations.


  12. At Inkwell and Bush Tea,

    As expected. Thank you.


    The monies that would be deposited by individuals, businesses and other relevant entities into the schemes.

    We agree with the mixed political economy description for Barbados. Under the schemes, there will be monies given to the government to be used in the context of the government/private/individual sectors’ combining in the same cases to constantly provide for opportunities for the uses by others of the relevant administrative, social, national emergency and productive services. The will be no compromising on the efficient and effective management of the delivery of these kinds of services by the same government/private sector/individual sector combinations as these services must be looked upon by the PDC as fundamental causes for the existence of a very lean sized socially responsible state/government in this country. Any intervention in the market will be done in line with what was delineated above, and within the capacity of the government to act reasonably, and within its own means – on the behalf of others and itself. In the private sector a coalitional government involving the PDC will use the appropriate fiscal financial monetary administrative and other regimes and strictures to make sure the cost of use of money by the relevant people, businesses and other entities is substantially reduced in the long term in every sphere possible in this country, via the removal of interest rates, so-called repayable loans, the abolition of motor vehicle insurance, exchange rates parities with the Barbados Dollar, etc, and thenceforward the putting in place of many very progressive regimes and policies to reduce the cost of living and doing business in the country while at the same time making sure that Barbados achieves average annual real growth rates of 8 – 10 per cent.


    All financial institutions will comply with our government laws and policies. The fact is that the financial sector is the most unproductive sector in Barbados yet is one of the most destructive diabolical sectors in the country. The financial sector will be totally reined in under a government in which the PDC is involved. All financial institutions will have to serve the fundamental interests of the people, other non-financial businesses and other entities in this country.

    The fact being that money cannot (be used to) cost money and cannot (be used to) make money and that the use of money is nil costs, show the wicked lengths to which the monetary authorities, commercial banks, credit unions, finance houses, will go to make sure that there is a great amount of legerdermain unfair manipulation and deceit that is brazenly heaped on the hapless victims of their wickedness. One very possible outcome of these vulgar inglorious effects is that the financial system – and government too – if not derailed from off their paths – will take Barbados down the hell seeking road towards Greece, Cyprus, Portugal, etc in the long term.

    All financial institutions will have to invest in productive and non-productive activities and use money to get future income or payment – just like how the non-financial private sector does it, or use their little real available financial accounting consultation expertise and acumen to the benefit of many others who would give them an amount of money to use with others in securing further remuneration down the road. Under the schemes, no financial institution will charge any person, business, or any other in Barbados for mere use at any time of the Barbadian people’s money, nor will any such person, business or any other entity get money owing to their providing at any time the Barbadian people’s money to any financial institution in the country, unless, of course, it is the return of the equivalent amount of saved income, payment, transfer put in the institution earlier, or any part thereof.



  13. St George's Dragon

    I have read this thread with interest and it has changed my view of how the relationship between Government and the people in Barbados is intended to work. Previously, I had thought that (looking specifically at VAT) businesses which fall within the regulations had to pay VAT on their sales and if they over paid, they got the money back.
    I now realise that it is not that simple and you will not get a refund in the following circumstances:
    – unless you know the right people
    – if you made a contribution to the losing party at the last election
    – you are a small hotelier
    – at all because Government has been withholding VAT refunds for a long time
    – because you are part of the tourist industry which has had Government support in the past
    – if you are white business owner
    – unless your business is run as a worker cooperative
    – unless you get the ex-colonial powers to pay reparation money for slavery
    – until Al Barrack has been paid
    – if you are Adrian Loveridge
    Scary. Rules are rules and refunds should be paid to all who are entitled to them/


  14. Pacamama
    Common sense and comprehension seem to escape your grips every time. Yes, I would vote for a white candidate if he or she represented where I believe Barbados should go. They are Bajans too; you joker you.


  15. Pacamama
    I was reading the people you have now catch up with in my teens. All human systems are built on greed and control; do not be fooled by the window dressing, my friend.


  16. I am curious to know who are these “small business ‘ adrien speaking of.


  17. Artaxerxes,

    Let us say that Barbadians will be ensuring that the process of circulating their own money comes about at the lowest costs to their incomes, payments and transfers (nominal).

    At what ever levels you are thinking about, Barbadians and non-Barbadians alike contribute to national/domestic output, here or elsewhere. They contribute to the production, distribution and use of goods and services via ONLY the use of their own labour or entrepreneurial services and the use of tools, technologies, machineries, vehicles, etc.

    Money plays NO role whatsoever in such non-money production, distribution and use affairs!! The ONLY role that money is made to play by its users is a USE role whenever it involves the said users giving money to get money – then or later – whether or not it is the same monies – in whatever contextual expressions. MONEY PLAYS NO ROLE WHEN IT IS IDLE!!

    So, whether money is given to and received by one another voluntarily, or handed over to and received by the government from the relevant individuals, businesses or other entities through forcible means, at the same or different times, non-money commodities exist on one level, services at another level, and money at another level. They do not ever mix, even though they can be and are combined by human beings many times. They are like the material, the spiritual and the intellectual – which do not mix but combine countless times via human intervention.

    In their natural states, none of the three causes any other, or shapes the other. But in their unnatural states (meaning with human intervention) none of the three causes any other, or shapes the other, without the use of at least one other!! But the stark possibility still exist that one cannot change at least one other, in an unnatural state of affairs.

    So a similar thing applies to non-money commodities, services or money in their natural states: none causes the other or shapes the other. But in their unnatural states(meaning with human intervention) none of the three causes any other, or shapes the other, without the use of at least one other. The distinct possibility still exist that one cannot change one other, in an unnatural state of affairs. So, the part statement that “these people will not contribute to the provision of goods and services THROUGH taxation”, is a correct and valid one in the sense that “these people will NOT contribute to the provision of goods and services (which exist at one level) THROUGH taxation (which exist at another level) and a correct and valid one from the point of view that it is possible to see every circumstance where people will not contribute to the provision of goods and services THROUGH taxation.



  18. And if you don’t understand now, Artaxerxes, you are more dense than lead.


  19. Carson C. Cadogan

    St George’s Dragon | April 29, 2013 at 10:14 PM

    You carrying it a bit too far.


  20. Carson C. Cadogan

    Worth a listen


  21. @ac
    Your ignorance knows no bounds. A small business is one that employs less than a prescribed number of people, or whose turnover is less than a prescribed amount. Both these numbers depend on the country in which they operate. So in the U.S., a small business is one that turns over less than US$10 millions, whereas in Barbados it might be one that turns over less than BD$1 million, or employs less than 20 persons. So the majority of people employed in Barbados in the private sector are employed in small businesses, or micro-businesses, by far the majority being black-owned and operated. So look around you ac, there are small businesses everywhere.


  22. Admittedly, The Crane is not exactly a small biz; but just want to say:

    Kudos to The Crane

    The April 27 issue of the National Post newspaper in Toronto included a 32 page glossy advertising magazine supplement Grand Luxury Travel, focused on the upper end traveler. Go to:

    Page 9 is a full page ad for St. Lucia Tourism.

    Page 17 is a full age ad for The Crane. There being no Flying Fish logo included suggests no BTA (taxpayer) participation, the ad being paid by The Crane.

    It is undoubtedly a pretty pricey ad, which smaller hotels could not afford; but surely BHTA could do something along these lines on behalf of its members


  23. Carson C. Cadogan

    The Crane Hotel and Accra Beach hotel certainly are run by Business people.

    I don’t know what to call the others.


  24. Adrian Loveridge

    Carson, why would good ‘business people’ need to beg nearly $1 million in TIRF taxpayer funds to help subsidise their hotel?


  25. Carson…………..i got one here for you to see.


  26. How come no one is commenting on this today?


  27. Bushie……….these ILO guys are not as frivolous as you were trying to lead me to believe………..these guys are serious as heart attacks, can you tell me that the administration is willing to test them???


  28. @ Inkwell

    I certainly don’t understand, moreso at this level than the other level.


  29. Carson C. Cadogan

    Well well

    I saw that one as WELL.


  30. Carson C. Cadogan

    Adrian when you were closing down for half the year and so on and laying off staff, Accra Beach Hotel staff were working full weeks and in some cases overtime.


  31. Carson………………Greece is about to lay off 15, 000 civil servants, very great cause for concern………..


  32. @peltdown

    Everybody think there are so smart.. Well yes sometimes ignorance is necessary in order to get the truth or understandin how a person is thinking.
    The fact is after all the talk about the “small business” who reallyt is Adrien speaking about .Does it include the small corner shop, The beauty shops . The entrepenuer having a small store in Swan street. Lets be clear these people struggle and very little is written or said about govt helping these people when they fall or hard times and bTW most of them are black. where are the cries for such people.Therfore my query was one of getting more information from Adrien as to whom he was speaking about. U pletdown ought to mind your business u think u so smart.;
    i don’t need no lecture from u . I have a business thank god i do not need any govt help but there are times when people say things that they should expand on. u dimb a.sss


  33. small business people can include anyone who own a small business but let’s put everything it its right perspective and call a spade a spade. no pusstfooting and pretending . if one delivers a statement come clean say what you mean. there are too many selfserving individuals roaming this planet that only sees a need for something when it affects them personally and need support for their business or cause.


  34. Carson C. Cadogan

    From Facebook


    Unconfirmed reports crossing my desk suggest that former MP Mr Rommell Marshall was allegedly arrested last week at the Bridgetown port on drugs charges. Apparently it is concerning the import of BBQ grills and coals with drugs hidden in the coals.

    Attempts to contact the port authority and Mr Marshall has proven futile, but workers at the port claim to have witnessed the event!!

    Raquel Gilkes

    Could this be true?


  35. Carson C. Cadogan

    Well Well | April 30, 2013 at 9:32 PM

    Very little escapes me.


  36. St George's Dragon

    I just read Haynesley Benn’s comments in the Advocate about the value of VAT owed by businesses.
    What worries me is that the figures Government quotes of $300 million outstanding for VAT and $177 million for land tax may not actually be realisable.
    The figures reported just appear to be a historic total of the amounts which have not been paid in the past. What evidence does Government have that the amounts due are actually recoverable?
    A case in point is Bajan Cleaning Enterprises. It looks as though they have gone (or are about to go) bust owing close to $3.5 million in VAT. You can bet that this included in the $300 million quoted figure. If it was, then clearly it is unlikely to be paid now and questions need to be asked about whether it should have continued to be carried as a debt when there were serious questions about whether it would ever be paid.
    Businesses look at outstanding debts every year to see if they are recoverable. If they are not, they write them off.
    I have seen nothing to show that Government has a similar process in place. That means that we are left assuming that huge sums of money are due to Government and will be paid when that may well not be the case.
    This is important when Barbados is struggling with public debt and borrowings.


  37. Artaxerxes

    @ PDC

    What effect would your proposed monetary policy have on the national debt and fiscal deficit, especially in this prevailing protracted economic recession, taking into consideration that Barbados is a mixed economy, which is not at full employment? How would these policies help stabilise the economy and smooth business cycle fluctuations? How are these policies related to the current account and international capital flows? What about the impact on foreign direct investments?

    As you are aware, government provides a broad range of essential goods and services, which require the collection of taxes. Additionally, although changes in taxation is a classic counter-cyclical fiscal policy, abolishing taxes will increase the fiscal deficit. Overtime, an increase in the budget deficit resulting from the abolition of, or cut in taxes, will increase the public debt. This increase will raise important issues concerning the long-run effects of the removal of taxes on interest rates, capital investment and the future economic welfare.

    Lower taxes, [ceteris paribus], will increase the disposable income of households. As a consequence, how much is spent or saved, and the response of economic
    activity, will no doubt depend on the the decision households make and the prevailing macroeconomic environment.

    Under your proposals, will foreign capital inflows increase to offset any decrease in national savings as a result of these monetary changes? If they do, then the current account deficit, which is equal to the quantity of foreign capital inflows, will increase enough to offset the increase in the budget deficit less the induced decrease in private savings. As a result, the future levels of capital stock and real output will not decrease, but future domestic consumption will, because an increased share of the return to capital will accrue to foreign investors.


  38. nobody worries about who owes the govt. the mantra is about what the govt owes “them”.


  39. What is this, is the government paying people to come to Barbados so they tourism figures can be pumped up??


  40. Carson……………we all know Rommel is a few cards short of a full deck, but when him an BLP fell out, he fell right into bed with DLP without pause…… you do need to find out who the other players are in the grand scheme of things…..and why was the public not informed that a former parliamentarian and politician was arrested??


  41. So are we to believe the government is cutting out the middle man (hotels) and going straight to the source (the tourist) and pump millions of taxpayers dollars into the pockets of tourists, so they will visit the island? I am definitely against giving hotels and hoteliers anymore taxpayers dollars, but how can you justify giving millions to the tourists……….never heard of this before, which other country in the world pays tourists to visit them, especially broke tourists?


  42. @St.Georges Dragon

    To follow your last comment, if the statutory bodies were compliant with international standards would the ageing of the debt not be clarified and therefore less open to manipulation by politicians?

    @Well Well

    Governments including Barbados have given air credits ie. directly to the airlines meaning most of it never got spent on Barbados. This way the money is sure to be spent in Barbados. The industry unfortunately is heavily discounted.


  43. Ah ha………..i was wondering about the method, if I remember correctly, it is coupons that are only redeemable in Bim??


  44. Artaxerxes

    The PDC has evolved twelve (12) fundamental principles concerning MONEY and its uses in Barbados.

    Here is the number 3 principle – M, or its uses, CANNOT give rise to M debt – nothing can anyhow (any amount of M when transferred by any financial institution to another institution – financial or otherwise – or to a person, or vice-a-versa, when eventually used by them in the goods and services market will NOT be traced by them for any reasonable length of time, or the recipients of the transferred use of money of any knowledge of tracing where such money would have come from (some time before the person that was using the money in their presence ) – so there is NO such thing as M debt – just M and its being used by persons). M – in other relevant cases though – can only represent nominal income, payment, transfer debts of individuals, businesses, etc (where at any times individuals, businesses, etc. lent some portions, or all, of their incomes, payments, transfers, to others, they are therefore indebted to, because it is their properties that are lent and that are personal corporate ones that can be referenced, that are recordable/traceable – the same thing applies to those financial institutions that are indebted to savers/policyholders who have placed saved income, payments, and transfers in those institutions).

    The reason for reproducing this principle is to let you know, Artaxerxes, that the National Institutional Non-Repayable Productive Loans Scheme and the National Institutional Non-Repayable Non-Productive Loans Scheme will be tasked with the application, where necessary, of that principle to various financial circumstances in the country. The primary reason for the existence of these schemes will not only be to support – politically, technically and otherwise, all national sub-national efforts related to the securing of a POST-TAXATION society for Barbados (including the liberation of the entire Barbadian people from the evil scourge of TAXATION), but also to eliminate – in whatever ways – all so-called individual, corporate, sectoral and other debts that would have otherwise arisen out of financial institutions in Barbados taking the people’s money and so-called lending it to them.

    Indeed, one of the many political financial effects of this paradigmatic transformation will be the ability of all Barbadians, all Barbadian enterpprises, including the government of Barbados, in Barbados, to use money out of all money collecting financial institutions in this country, and not ever have short or long term debt imposed upon them by these institutions and themselves, and not fear the use by them of any amounts of money in any proposed business ventures of theirs, and too not fear some of the political legal consequences of the use of our OWN money in any commercial business social settings. To be continued……. Artaxerxes.



  45. PDC……………i noticed you danced around and side-stepped the below questions that remain on record……………………can you now answer me, if you want people to take you seriously, you have to deal with all the issues and concerns, every last one of them…………

    Well Well | April 29, 2013 at 7:51 PM |

    “money will also come from the Central Bank of Barbados, finance houses etc as well as from the peripheral financial system”.

    PDC……………you do realize that the Central Bank of Barbados is guided by banking rules and regulations coming out of Europe and North America??, how do you plan to follow their guidelines and still create a new monetary system without getting rid of the Central Bank?? appears you still want to keep the bank, but you cannot do so unless you follow foreign banking rules and regulations.


  46. Artaxerxes

    @ St. Georges Dragon
    “What worries me is that the figures Government quotes of $300 million outstanding for VAT”

    All politicians have the gift of manipulating figures. What Benn should have done is to give us a breakdown of the how much of the VAT debt is owed by the public and private sectors. For procurement purposes, government departments stipulate that persons doing business with them, must produce VAT, NIS and PAYE clearance certificates. There are statutory corporations that provide services such as SSA, NCC, NCF, NPC, National Sports Council, Transport Board. Then there are the ministries/departments that also charge VAT, such as the Post Office, Government Printery, Grantley Adams International Airport, Queen Elizabeth Hospital. What is the VAT debt status?

    It is a known fact that cash strapped statutory corporations, as do the private sector, will submit NIS schedules and not the associated remittance. Does the same apply to VAT?


  47. IT is called effeciency the way the govt has gone about distributing the 11million instead of putting it in the hands of hoteliers who have abused the system and mismanged the billions given to them over the years in an all out effort by previuous adminstrations to secure jobs


  48. AC………………i now understand the why for their actions, but would still like to confirm that these coupons are only redeemable in Barbados…


  49. Art…………..and more importantly, the names/business names and addresses of these tax dodgers who owe the government/taxpayers this sum of over 1/4 billion dollars should be published for the public to see who has been scamming them………why is the government still giving us half the story??


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: Logo

You are commenting using your 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