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.

Tags: , , , ,

No Comments on “Government Needs to Protect Small Businesses”

  1. Carson C. Cadogan May 1, 2013 at 8:36 AM #

    The Government is going about the Tourism issues the correct way.

    The Taxpaying public has subsidized the Tourist for far too long. They need to get off their duffs and help them selves. Fortunately they are a few Hotels in Barbados on the right track.

    The others want money to buy BMW’s, Mercedes, Yachts in the Careenage, etc.

    Like

  2. Carson C. Cadogan May 1, 2013 at 8:36 AM #

    should be “Tourist Industry”.

    Like

  3. David May 1, 2013 at 9:03 AM #

    @Well Well

    The coupons can only be used at participating merchants in Barbados. The BTA was forced to move to an initiative like this one because the market had copied they other discount programs according to Avril Byer.

    Like

  4. ac May 1, 2013 at 9:10 AM #

    The only solution would be for investgative information by media oulets to pursue the issue and to opublish the names. However i am not sure if it is confidential information protected by a “privacy ACT” also another problem that might be problematic for govt getting invoved in the declartion of these entities might be a blacklash from potential investors who would see this information as damaging to their business and reputations and a real cause for concern

    Like

  5. St George's Dragon May 1, 2013 at 9:16 AM #

    So let’s list the VAT offenders:
    – Courts (reputedly) – $25 million
    – Bajan Cleaning Services (now not recoverable) – $3.5 million
    ….any others?

    Like

  6. Well Well May 1, 2013 at 9:20 AM #

    What could be more damaging to the taxpayers and government than businesses owing over 1/4 billion dollars in taxes?? furthermore, why is government allowing a privacy act to stay in place that protects businesses when they dodge taxes, the government should not be complaining when they are owed such huge sums, they are actually enabling the criminal act of tax dodging by keeping the privacy act in place to protect tax dodging companies who rely on taxpayers for their very survival………..this does not bode well for collecting taxes. Government is acting like the country is not in crisis, i now believe given what we are discussing that they will no way collect any of the 1/4 billion dollars owed…………..both parties had many years to change those privacy act laws.

    Like

  7. JUST ASKING May 1, 2013 at 9:22 AM #

    The authorities need to enforce the Laws of BARBADOS but the authorities are lenient and feeling for people because if the law is enforced it will touch everybody and some people feel that they are untouchable and the laws do not apply to them, their sons , daughters. cousins, and other relatives and even their friends and aquaintances .

    If an Officer reports a person on the road that person then calls his friend who knows a gazzetted Officer who cannot tell him NO and who then uses his influence on the Station Sargeant/Constable to have the report quashed .

    If this shite continue how will we ever get things right. The law should be foe everybody.

    Like

  8. Well Well May 1, 2013 at 9:24 AM #

    AC……………….foreign investors have Freedom of Information Acts in their own countries…………they expect those Acts in any countries they are planning to invest in, if the Act does not exist in Barbados…………their investment will turn into a scam that the investor will make sure he is the prime beneficiary………………if the government ever gets the balls to get rid of those privacy acts and legislate Freedom of Information Acts, it will in no way deter investors from bringing their money to the Island……………ask Trinidad.

    Like

  9. St George's Dragon May 1, 2013 at 9:34 AM #

    Copied from (as they quaintly say) another section of the press, and with the health warnings that this is from 2011 and that you are innocent until proved guilty:
    Below is a list of some of the cases lodged in the Supreme Court involving the VAT Department.
    – Rayside Construction [case No .2175/05] $5 198 828. 35 for Inland Revenue;
    -Clarke’s Auto Express [case No. 1729/2000] $1 250 932.51 for the VAT Department;
    -Spektakula Promotions [case No. 1630/03] $446 354.99 for VAT;
    -Pierce Furniture & Furnishings Ltd [case no.1255/03] $981 866.58 in VAT;
    -Roger Hill Trading as Sazzy Boutique [case No. 476/03] $878 615.42 in VAT;
    -Wild Pair Shoes [case No. 2719/02] $549 083.34 in VAT; and
    -Kentucky Fried Chicken [case no.115/02] $461 837.63 in VAT.
    -Divi Southwinds faces two judgements for [case No. 1217/01] $374 239. 43 and [case No. 1218/01] $673 961.09;
    -Grant Hotels Inc. has four judgements for $1 250 766.55 [case No. 2100/99], $826 744.87 [case No. 1157/03] and $27 229.36 [case No. 2099/99] for Inland Revenue and $880 420.39 [case No. 1074/03] for VAT

    Like

  10. David May 1, 2013 at 9:37 AM #

    The days of political bullshit is over. The mess is beginning to hit the fan. Only the political yardfowls believe in the old ways.

    Like

  11. David May 1, 2013 at 9:39 AM #

    BU notes that Roger Hill is on the list who we all know is one of the partners in FAS Entertainment with Al Gilkes, the promoter of Reggae on the Hill. Of note is that the government through the Barbados Tourism Authority is a major sponsor.

    One incestuous pit!

    Like

  12. Well Well May 1, 2013 at 9:42 AM #

    AC……………any actions lodged in the courts are public knowledge, the government could have exposed these names and court docket numbers many years ago……………..i hope they realize it’s the taxpayers they will now have to face as this unfolds and all the years of fancy talk, that has now turned into putrid bull is now beginning to splatter far and wide, and they will not be able to escape being drenched in this farce of their own making.

    Like

  13. St George's Dragon May 1, 2013 at 9:43 AM #

    …..and from “another section of the press” from over two years ago:
    “Thursday, a senior Government official told the ***** that money owed to the state could likely be more than B$200 million since there were many outstanding sums that had not reached the stage of certificates of judgement being lodged.
    He explained that in several instances the judgements had been re-registered at the five-year stipulated period to prevent them being voided, in keeping with Section 3 Subsection (1) of the Registration of Judgements Act, Chapter 210.
    The official suggested that with the 2.5 per cent increase in VAT there was the real danger that while Government might be collecting more revenue, there was the possible flip side that outstanding fees due to the state could also likely get cumulatively greater.
    He said it was crucial that Government enforced the law and collections be dealt with as a matter of national priority.
    “A charging order can be placed on these people’s properties and they can be sold but this is not being done. There are a number of things to consider, I guess, such as people being employed and the need for enterprises to keep functioning,” he said.
    When contacted Minister of Finance Chris Sinckler, under whose portfolio the VAT and Inland Revenue departments fall, told the ****** the situation was very serious. He said that defaulters should make every effort to meet with both the VAT and Inland Revenue departments and make arrangements to have their payment issues settled.
    Sinckler said the massive sums owed Government could go a significant distance in servicing some of the needs of the country.”
    So what has been done in the last two tears to address the situation?

    Like

  14. St George's Dragon May 1, 2013 at 9:45 AM #

    Freudian slip. That should be “years” in the last sentence.

    Like

  15. Well Well May 1, 2013 at 9:47 AM #

    Carson……………….don’t forget some of the small hotel owners also want the black taxpayers to pay them through government for something that white england did to their white ancestors over 400 years ago, also have to watch out for those opportunistic whites.

    Like

  16. Well Well May 1, 2013 at 9:52 AM #

    Tears is right…………..St. Georges……………they will all be crying real tears pretty soon, for sitting and doing nothing about this situation, even seizing properties would have been better than what is now on the horizon, at least they would have had assets and keep the businesses open with government as the new owners, instead they did nothing, expecting some business owner to walk into VAT office with a 25 million dollar cheque or even a $100K (grand) cheque………………amazing.

    Like

  17. Well Well May 1, 2013 at 9:54 AM #

    This word expecting keeps being associated with Sinckler…………..i wonder what he is expecting next?

    Like

  18. David May 1, 2013 at 9:54 AM #

    We need to hear more about why COURT BARBADOS has not paid 25 million VAT due.

    Like

  19. Adrian Loveridge May 1, 2013 at 9:59 AM #

    David,
    If the quoted figures are correct, a former BHTA President and a current board member of the Barbados Tourism Authority is among those running businesses with judgements against them! What chance do ‘we’ stand?

    Like

  20. Carson C. Cadogan May 1, 2013 at 10:08 AM #

    Well Well | May 1, 2013 at 9:47 AM

    you gine get cuss!!!

    Like

  21. Adrian Loveridge May 1, 2013 at 10:09 AM #

    David,
    And lest we forget, did Divi Southwinds also receive $138,909.38 in TIRF (Tourism Industry Relief Funds) taxpayers monies on 27.05.2009?

    Like

  22. David May 1, 2013 at 10:12 AM #

    @Adrian

    Correction, DIVI does not belong to Alvin Jemmott, he is the general manager.

    Like

  23. Well Well May 1, 2013 at 10:21 AM #

    Carson……………let them bring it on……….i have more powerful ammunition.

    Like

  24. ac May 1, 2013 at 11:44 AM #

    The seriiousness iof the uncollected monies due to govt not only affect the economy but is a heavy price and a burden that the average working stiff have to pay in heavy taxation in helping to cover these losses and keep country afloat .Something should be done about this gross injustice heaped upon the working stiff by tax dodgers and govt must shoulder this responsibilty by taking action.

    Like

  25. David May 1, 2013 at 12:05 PM #

    What it shows is very poor revenue collection practices by government. It shows many of our private sector companies are inefficiently and unethically managed. It shows Barbadians are blissfully unaware of what is happening because this is one of the talking points which should have resonated last general election.

    Like

  26. The People's Democratic Congress May 1, 2013 at 12:29 PM #

    Aside from the current situation that the government debt, the fiscal deficit of the government, the depression in Barbados and the employment situation and other relevant situations are worsening and that they altogether have been caused by many of the wicked inept policies and programs of governments, private sector and other people in this country over the years; and which are policies and programs that we and many others in Barbados and beyond will abolish and re-orient under a coalition government involving the PDC, we must nevertheless say that it must be considered by many individuals that these distressing situations are primarily the effects of their own causes.

    So, it would be extremely difficult next to impossible to properly say what the effects are and what the extent of these effects would be of the implementation of these proposed policies on the situations/variables you have mentioned, if these said dysfunctional variables and others and their contaminated mangled environments were to remain in existence in Barbados. It would be like studying the effects of kerosene oil alone when the kerosene oil has been added to water that has already been in a small fungus bearing moss rust catching steel can that itself has long had debris and diesel and gasoline mixed up in it.

    So, there are entirely different variables, propositions hypotheses, assumptions, deductions and predictions and many entirely different relationships between and among them, that we have been dealing with (as should have been gathered by yourself). So it is clear that things like government debts or government deficits, recessions, employment, will naturally be abolished, prevented or re-oriented by means of the implementation of laws, regulations, directions, policies of a coalition government of Barbados involving the PDC.

    So, we will not be dealing with/theorizing for any debts of government, or for any fiscal deficits of any government, any recessions, employment, any economy, in the context of the laws, regulations, the policies, directions related to the establishment of these schemes, given the application then by our coalition government and many others of those twelve (12) principles and many other financial and other principles to any of the financial circumstances of the country.

    To provide a definite firm example: we are dealing with/theorizing for partnerships, instead of companies, corporations;we are dealing with partners rather than workers, supervisors, managers, owners; we are dealing with remunerations of partners, not wages and salaries of workers, supervisors, managers, owners, etc; and we are hypothesizing for partnerships, on a majority basis, agreeing to take on or dispose of partners, and not a few managing directors or other managers doing so.

    Although we would agree that there will still then be practised by many people many ideologies, philosophies and psychologies that are in existence today and that have long been in existence – ideas related to the fact of money itself; the fact of the need for financial institutions and governmental institutions in Barbados; related to the fact that we are human beings, etc and that we will continue to practice certain social political cultural behaviours, attitudes and values, in many social political legal material financial settings, we wish to say still that many of the effects of our policies and programs must be properly extensively studied/hypothesized based on their own likely causes and their resultant effects, for their assumed strengths and weaknesses, or for their likely differences between theory and facts.

    Hence, the PDC is concerned about the ideas espoused by some that the debts or fiscal deficits of the government or of corporations in Barbados only come about through – what we know are – many people’s practising the false ideology, the false philosophy and false psychology that debts emerge out of the use of money, and not as a result of – what we in the PDC know too – the practising and the processing of agreements between minds, and the practising and processing of laws that are unequally disposed between the many minds involved in the process of sensing such ideas, such thoughts and such mentalities into practical human behaviour consistent with the consequent use of money in particular ways in particular settings.

    So, the PDC has to arrive at situations where many more minds in Barbados will accept and agree to the fact that M – in any spheres of human life in Barbados – can never lead to M debt – and of course by our going to the circumstances of the sources of the false perceptions of money debt and dominating them with these moral ideological philosophical psychological principles that are focussed on M and its better uses in the country. To be continued………..Artaxerxes

    PDC

    Like

  27. The People's Democratic Congress May 1, 2013 at 12:37 PM #

    Well Well,

    We will answer you shortly.

    PDC

    Like

  28. Well Well May 1, 2013 at 12:57 PM #

    David…………………for some reason the opposition did not think it necessary to touch the tax dodging topic during elections, that would have started under their management as well back in the 90s and allowed to continue into 2013.

    Like

  29. ac May 1, 2013 at 1:07 PM #

    Now here is an area where Caswelll and BU would be of great benefit in educating the misinformed pubklic by publicly realeasing the names of these giant corporation if gvt does not have the guts to deal with this problem afterall a country in debt and millions of dollars floating around uncollected . Something not right

    Like

  30. Hants May 1, 2013 at 1:43 PM #

    David, “Only the political yardfowls believe in the old ways.”

    Internet,blogs,facebook, cel phone cameras……It will become increasingly difficult to hide.

    Expect some Bajan wicked leaks as things worsen.

    Like

  31. The People's Democratic Congress May 1, 2013 at 4:08 PM #

    On the basis of our model theorizations, many persons, businesses and other entities will – using these schemes and other apposite arrangements – realize for one another, and by extension the entire collective of people too, greater commercial activity in the country, in terms of actual medium/long term increases of quantities of imports, exports; in terms of actual medium/long term increases in the amounts/volumes of domestic and foreign capital, investment, technology, fixed and capital assets; in terms of actual medium/long term increases in the building and constructing of fixed assets (factories, plants, offices, homes, roads, bridges, etc); in terms of actual medium/long term increases in the manufacturing and distribution of consumer, capital and intermediate goods; and in
    terms of actual medium long/ term increases in agricultural and food production, and in other regards.

    Such increases in output will be based on/caused by the expansion of human physical mechanical electrical technological efforts.

    Such increases will NOT be however caused by any thing associated with the money base or any increases by the masses and middle classes of Barbados of use of money, but will be reflective/supportive of the question of how human beings have been able to contradict or compete with one another over many political material financial and other affairs in the quest to survive and develop as time goes by.

    Artaxerxes, we still see that you are introjecting notions of fiscal/budget deficits, interest rates, lower taxes, etc into the model theory, when already such is inapplicable.

    Your question: whether foreign capital flows would increase to offset any decrease in the national savings as a result of such monetary changes? is an interesting one. But let us ask you: how do they get here?? Do you think even a quarter of all of those capital inflows really come here?? There is really no basis for contrasting the two, especially since the local money from which the majority of domestic savings are derived are almost 100 per cent in Barbados, and since there is a low amount of foreign capital inflows (numbers) into Barbados, with the vast majority remaining outside of Barbados. For Balance of Payments accounting purposes, these monies/numbers will be registered as income flows

    With the estimated rate of real actual cost of use of money (local) going downwards tremendously over time in Barbados, it must mean that when it is taken away from the size of monetary base, it will give the estimated rate of actual benefit of use of money. This means too that if the estimated rate of real actual cost of use of money is lowered from 84 per cent at this juncture, to 50 per cent at the next 5 years, that the estimated 16 per cent that is the estimated real actual benefit of use of money in the country today, will increase to 50 per cent at the next 5 years, altogether on annualized bases.

    This 50 per cent rate of benefit would signify the extent to which the financial institutions owe the savers saved remuneration and the extent to which persons are using other means of saving. As the rate of real actual cost of use of money goes down and down it will begin to be explained by the cost of use of money theory that financial institutions are not charging for the use of money and that more and more people will be using other means of saving, while at the same time there will be greater than now increases in the use of money in many sectors by individuals, businesses and other entities.

    So there we go, Artaxerxes.

    PDC

    Like

  32. Well Well May 2, 2013 at 8:56 AM #

    Tourism, at it’s ugliest………………

    http://www.trinidadexpress.com/news/UK-man-in-court-for-assaulting-boy-205698791.html

    Like

  33. St George's Dragon May 2, 2013 at 9:37 PM #

    @ PDC
    Please explain, for someone who has tried for a long time to understand your policies, just one simple expression that you use. What does “the real actual cost of use of money” mean. And I may have this wrong but is it the case that you do not believe that interest should be charged when money is lent?
    What is the difference between interest and “real actual cost of use of money”, or is that me misunderstanding something?

    Like

  34. The People's Democratic Congress May 3, 2013 at 7:15 AM #

    St. George’s Dragon,

    This theory of the cost of use of money starts from some very axiomatic factual assertions: that goods and services do not contain money; that goods and services do not actually bring in money; that prices only exist in the “minds” of people; that money does however exist outside of the “minds” of people; that money cannot cost or make money; and that use of money is zero money cost.

    So, given these monumental facts, it has been left to be concluded by the PDC that, in order to use money, and in their attempts to defy such logics, the monetary authorities, the commercial banks, credit unions, finance houses, the stock exchange, insurance companies, and share holding companies, etc plus savers of monies in commercial banks, policy holders in insurance companies, investors in the stock exchange, in share holding companies and government paper, etc are, on one set of hands, hierarchically charging one another’s incomes, payments or transfers for the others’ uses of money, and are , on the other set of hands, being hierarchically the beneficiaries of allowing others to have the use of money, respectively, and too in the vast majority of all of those transactions many persons and other entities are either, in many top down fashions, passing on – to some extent – such costs of use to others’ remunerations, or many persons and other entities too are, in many of the same top down fashions too, recovering – to some extent – some of those costs of use of money from such remunerations.

    What has also been clear in all commercial business transactions involving the use of money, in Barbados, is that the cost of use of money is only effectuated when the use of money is being transferred by persons, businesses and other entities to other such entities or when the use of such is being handed over by the relevant individuals or groups of individuals to the other relevant persons, businesses and other parties to these transactions. While there is also the transferral of use of goods by many persons, businesses, and other entities to other such entities simultaneously as the use of money is being transferred from sets of entities to other sets, the truth is that the cost of use of money is based on monies going from entities (costings) to entities and not to entities from other entities (benefittings) !!! It is based on monies spent out of extant incomes, payments and transfers. It therefore does not involve the government, to a greater extent, and the financial sector, to a lesser extent – since they are very unproductive and are essentially involved in transferring money from different entities to other ones. They hardly receive any or all of the following: incomes, payments, and transfers.

    Whereas, “the real actual cost of use of money”, is first and foremost an estimate of the real actual cost of use of money in only macro-industrial commercial sectoral settings, is expressed in percentage terms per year/ per month and is rated in terms of its performance over contrasting periods – one year/month with another year/month, in the sense in which it is herein used, the cost of use of money theory broadly describes, explains and predicts the extent which all persons, businesses, and other entities in Barbados are and are going to be using our own money (the Barbados) in all money transactions on a yearly basis in the country, and the amount it is and it is going to be costing us to use our money when contrasted with other periods.

    So, for instance, an entire set of persons have gone to their respective banks or credit unions or finance houses in a certain entire year and have got debit transfers of monies (so-called loans) from those institutions to them in the region of BDS $ 1 million altogether in money terms, no cheques etc.

    Now let us say there are interest charges to be made and added to the principals throughout the duration of the persons transferring of credit ( monies) (so-called loan repayments ) to the institutions and that these have been calculated before the start of the process of the credit transferrals of monies, and that these amounts divided into given years/ months are numerically what are to be expected by the parties to be handed in to the respective financial institutions in the final analysis. Hence, it must mean that these amounts therefore amount to be the theoretical costs of use of money for the years/months ahead.

    But, the actual costs of use of money will be the actual amounts that are handed in by the credit transferers ( people making them ) to the credit transferees (financial institutions) on a yearly/monthly bases, throughout the times of the contracts. The total amounts handed in might be more or less than what was theorized earlier for whatever reasons. If more, it might be because of the late fees or wacky interest formulas that some of the transferers faced. If less, might be because of hard times hitting some of the transferers, they going deep In arrears, and they therefore having to see the contracts terminated will be before their expected times of ending.

    Generally, the real actual cost of use of money takes into consideration the estimated size of the money base, especially because it is a relatively fixed amount of money that all users of money are using and are being charged for, muchly because it is all or virtually all of the same money that is being used by the same users, and truly because with growth or decline in the size of it there are implications for the cost of use of money. Imagine that in the scenario presented above that the money base was only BDS $ 10 000 that much of it was being recycled among the same users, and that the estimated rate of the real cost of use of money was 20 per cent!!! To be continued……. St. George’s Dragon.

    PDC

    Like

  35. The People's Democratic Congress May 3, 2013 at 9:15 AM #

    St. George’s Dragon

    You are correct.

    Interest Rates are wrong and evil and suggest that money can make money or cost money, when in truth and in fact that is impossible. Wheresoever, whenever there are interest rates regimes, they increase the cost of use of money, esp in a context where the monetary base is relatively fixed at periods of time.

    As you can see from our last post before this one, the real cost of use of money in Barbados includes but is clearly therefore not limited to interest rates costs.

    Interest Rates costs are a relatively small component of these costs when contrasted with, say, the principals of so-called loans got of which equivalent amounts are fetched and handed in by the credit transferors to the relevant financial institutions.

    PDC

    Like

  36. Well Well May 3, 2013 at 9:28 AM #

    This is how these cases are supposed to be handled………..

    http://www.trinidadexpress.com/news/Yachtie-66-on-sex-charge-denied-bail–205896241.html

    Like

  37. Dr Love May 3, 2013 at 3:45 PM #

    @PDC
    a small flaw in your theory.
    People!

    Like

  38. PLANTATION DEEDS FROM 1926-2013 AND SEE MASSIVE FRAUD ,LAND TAX BILLS AND NO DEEDS May 4, 2013 at 9:22 AM #

    The only small business the Government have is robbing the people of big money. Vampires thy eare sucking the People dry , If or when your small business get to big for you, The GOVT will take it over , What she going to do with all daaaa dayyy SOOOOO.,then they step in and take it , For as we can see they know better than the owners who made the business grow to a large business.

    Like

  39. PLANTATION DEEDS FROM 1926-2013 AND SEE MASSIVE FRAUD ,LAND TAX BILLS AND NO DEEDS May 4, 2013 at 9:43 AM #

    http://keltruthblog.com/blog/?p=367

    Like

  40. PLANTATION DEEDS FROM 1926-2013 AND SEE MASSIVE FRAUD ,LAND TAX BILLS AND NO DEEDS May 4, 2013 at 9:49 AM #

    http://www.globaldata.com/ExpertsInsightDetails.aspx?PRID=806&Type=Industry&Title=Oil%20%26%20Gas

    Like

  41. Well Well May 4, 2013 at 10:21 AM #

    One things for sure, the taxpayers will definitely have to keep an eye on the politicians regarding this oil exploration, it is not beneath local politicians to keep any successes hidden from the taxpayers to satisfy their and their friends own self-serving interests……….

    Like

  42. PLANTATION DEEDS FROM 1926-2013 AND SEE MASSIVE FRAUD ,LAND TAX BILLS AND NO DEEDS May 5, 2013 at 8:49 AM #

    All the oil money will be in an offshore bank accounts , out of the reach of the People.

    Like

  43. Well Well May 5, 2013 at 9:17 AM #

    Don’t worry Plantation, it will be promptly frozen by the industrialized countries once they find out………….

    Like

  44. PLANTATION DEEDS FROM 1926-2013 AND SEE MASSIVE FRAUD ,LAND TAX BILLS AND NO DEEDS May 5, 2013 at 9:34 AM #

    Government Needs to Protect Small Businesses@ in American that turn in to big business , Slavery. if the judges kept it small it would not raise a RED FLAG. The Video is real at all levels of America . Most court cases start with a lie., a lie told to police who then send it in to the system , then the lawyers show up.take a plea and give me your hard earn money.
    American allow fraud to work to make money on all other groups, But when WHITE American is affected by the same fraud that is when they look to stop it.
    Barbados BLP /DLP plays that same game that work so well to fool and take from the People.

    Like

  45. The People's Democratic Congress May 5, 2013 at 12:31 PM #

    Since gaining independence in 1966, no political authorities other than the government of Barbados and the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC), and since the government of Barbados had cut ties with the said Council in the middle of the first decade of the 21st Century and at the same time acceded to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) whereupon the CCJ has been made to take the place of the JCPC – have been exercising sovereignty over the banking credit union and financial affairs of this country.

    So other than the CCJ, there is no other international or regional group that exercises any sovereignty over any banking and financial institutions or processes in this country. Furthermore, other than in the case of those regional inter-governmental agreements that were used to establish the said CCJ – no post independence government of Barbados has therefore entered into any otherwise relevant agreements with any other international or regional political state or non-state actors that have seen the government of Barbados relinquishing any sovereignty over these affairs.

    But there are times when the Cabinet of the government of Barbados – one of the governmental bodies that exercises sovereign power in Barbados, or the legislature – another one of the sovereign wielding bodies in Barbados – decides to share or relinquish sovereignty over the making of certain decisions in Barbados, not with a particular external extra-state or non-state grouping of people, but with a certain very professional subordinate semi-independent intra-state body of people , or does decide to delegate the making of such sovereign decisions in the country to such a body of people.

    The Central Bank of Barbados is therefore one of those domestic governmental institutions in which sovereignty has been vested in by the Cabinet of the government of Barbados to make particular decisions (the delegation of power to make certain) over certain domestic financial affairs in this country, eg, to issue the Barbados currency.

    So, where the Central Bank of Barbados is concerned, it cannot be seen by the PDC to be in turn relinquishing/delegating sovereignty over those decisions to any international or regional political state or non-state actors, or too to be at any time sharing sovereignty over those decisions with any such international regional political state or non-state actors, whereby in the first place it has to answer to a higher authority from which there is no appeal by it to another.

    Hence, Well Well, though you did not say it expressly, you implied it in one of your last blogs directed to us …….. (Appears you still want to keep the bank, but you cannot do so unless you FOLLOW foreign banking rules and regulations), the suggestion that the Central Bank of Barbados once it remains in existence it has to FOLLOW these FOREIGN BANKING RULES AND REGULATIONS – which you have so far failed to identify!!!

    Well, though, we are going to use some research information we recently came across from the internet to show you that the Central Bank of Barbados – as a sovereign decision maker it self too and the government of Barbados by extension do not have to follow any foreign banking rules and regulations whatsoever, contrary to what you so suggested previously in a few of your blogs under this thread.

    This information, which is verily drawn from wikipedia.org, can be said by the PDC to be official information about two of these international bodies that are involved in the international banking and finance arena – the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and the Bank for International Settlements – and which are the purveyors

    So from this information on wikipedia.org, it appears that the Basel Committee is “a committee of banking supervisory authorities” that was established by the Central Bank Governors of a group of countries in 1974 – Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, UK, and the USA. It also appears that it is “a forum for regular COOPERATION on banking supervisory matters”, and that a major objective of it is “to enhance understanding of key supervisory issues and improve the quality of banking supervision worldwide”. It is said – by the research information we saw – that some of its other functions are to frame guidelines and standards in different areas such as international standards on capital adequacy, the concordat on cross border banking, etc.

    In addition to the original members mentioned earlier some other member governments have joined them since that time and up to this time point in time: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Kuwait, Luxemborg, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, and Turkey.

    It appears from wikipedia.org also that the Bank for International Settlements is a bank for some Central Banks across various parts of the world, and that it fosters international monetary and financial COOPERATION. The article also states that this bank was formed in 1930 by the governments of Germany, France, Belgium, Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Italy, Japan, and Switzerland, and that it was originally intended to facilitate reparations imposed on Germany by the governments who established the Treaty of Versailles. The article also states that there are now 58 members of this bank.

    It is clear from the information given on wikipedia.org, that these two groups of supra-national actors are each allied with the other by way of the fact that, et al, they are based in Basel, Switzerland, some countries serve in both of them, they are central bank based groupings and they appear to focus on some of the same areas such as capital adequacy and reserve requirements in banking supervision across international banking networks.

    It is also obvious from the information researched that the Central Bank of Barbados is not a member of any of them and by extension the government of Barbados.

    Now to get to our argument that the Central Bank of Barbados is not bound to follow any of the recommendations, guidelines or frameworks of these two or any other international regional political financial non-state actors unless it is a part of them and agrees with the decisions of them, and that therefore too whenever a coalition government of which the PDC will be a part of comes to office in this country that there will be no mistake on the coalition’s part about the reconfiguration of monetary financial and fiscal affairs of Barbados to suit the well-being and development of the people, we have to point out to you – to quell your anxieties doubts about our monetary proposals, called them that, the same information states that, et al, there is no founding treaty for the Basel Committee, that it does not issue binding regulations, that it does not have the authority to enforce recommendations and that most member countries as well as some other non-member countries tend TO IMPLEMENT the committees policies.

    With regard to the Bank for International Settlements, the research shows as well that this bank is not accountable to any single national government, which, for us, clearly means that no governments or groups of governments – sovereign powers – can get it to do their political bidding by way of its acting in sovereign fashions in relationship to other esp. non-member states and to issues surrounding their sovereignty.

    While it is true that the information we have seen put out on wikipedia.org about these two groups can be construed by us as official lines and that there might be more beneath the surface of those official lines that speak to the manipulation and control by them of aspects of the political financial systems of some other countries, we are strongly of the belief that in those cases where such might happen, that at the same time the present Governor of the Central Bank of Barbados would not seek to improve what he thinks would be the efficiency and effectiveness in certain areas of the operations and administrations of the Central Bank and of the wider core financial system in the country by without adopting some of those standards and proposals that would in fact help do so.

    So the promulgating on our part is that where such standards and proposals for say capital adequacy are adopted for use by the Central Bank of Barbados, they are done so in cooperation or consultation with the Basel Committee or the BIS, and not by it having to follow any guidelines or whatever.

    PDC

    Like

  46. The People's Democratic Congress May 5, 2013 at 12:47 PM #

    An inadvertence…,,,,

    It should have been …….. purveyors of a number of western financial ideologies, philosophies and psychologies.

    PDC

    Like

  47. Well Well May 5, 2013 at 2:59 PM #

    PDC…………………i am not the one who has to identify the international banking rules and regulations regional Central Banks in the Caribbean MUST adhere to, you are the one wanting to be the ruler of a whole country, you should be the one already familiar with SEC banking rules and regulations as well as other banking regulations coming out of Europe that governs regional and international banks. If you do not know of these, you are not ready yet.

    Like

  48. The People's Democratic Congress May 5, 2013 at 4:28 PM #

    It is clear then that what you are talking about you do NOT know anything much about.

    We have never told you anything about juxtaposing any foreign banking rules and regulations with the model that we have evolved.

    You have been the person instigating such.

    We were hoping that you would have added to what research information we would have taken the time out and gone and reproduced hopefully for the benefit of the understanding of persons who frequent this blog and to show up the downright deficiencies in your arguments.

    But nothing of the sort you have come up with.

    Since you continue to fail to identify these FOREIGN RULES and REGULATIONS, and fail to deliberately support your arguments in these particular political financial affairs which we take very seriously, because we are not in politics to trifle with the lives or emotions of the people , it means that we will have NO further contact with you whatsoever on this blog, at least under that handle.

    We are not about wasting precious time on this blog or anywhere else with any persons who are about such failed fallacious psuedo-intellectual counter-diversionary tactics as yours, as this country continues daily to sink and sink further down the drain and as thousands upon thousands of people suffer and live in destitution and misery for primary reasons that DLP/BLP Governments continue to destroy many of the social, political, material and financial affairs of this country.

    What this country needs right now is serious leadership and with the support of many people inside and outside of it we will continue to do so more and more as time goes by.

    Hence, this is no time for pulling such otherwise sick intellectual pranks!!!

    For, it is clearly obvious that you are seeking to sow in the minds of a few persons on this blogsite unfounded and irrational fears about things you do NOT know anything much about, far less these imaginary delusionary foreign effects that only you yourself only know about on our models, or these paranoidic relationships that only you yourself suppose you know exist between these imagined effects and our model.

    We apologize to all of those people who constantly read many of our BU posts and who tell us so and who really would have been expecting a better discussion between us, for this type of intellectual fiasco.

    So, What a shame!!

    What an extremely negative mind too as it relates to this case!!.

    PDC

    Like

  49. Well Well May 5, 2013 at 7:02 PM #

    PDC……………….you might find this hard to believe, but i spent quite a few years in the North American banking system in their legal department, so i think that would qualify me more than you to know about international banking laws and the rules and regulations governing such laws, it is your job as someone who wants to govern any country, to know what this entails………..good luck!!

    Like

  50. Well Well May 5, 2013 at 7:07 PM #

    PDC said:

    We were hoping that you would have added to what research information we would have taken the time out and gone and reproduced hopefully for the benefit of the understanding of persons who frequent this blog and to show up the downright deficiencies in your arguments.

    But nothing of the sort you have come up with.

    PDC…………………….so why did you not just ask me if i had any such experience or knowledge, instead of making it seem like what i was speaking about does not exist…………..for people to start taking you seriously, you really need to do a lot of homework before you can move forward.

    Like

  51. Well Well May 5, 2013 at 7:17 PM #

    PDC…………………i cannot enable you in your delusions that local and regional banks do not have to meet or be governed by international banking laws and by the international financial system………….that would be doing exactly what you are accusing the DLP/BLP of doing, being blatantly and maliciously deceitful and dishonest to the taxpayers of Barbados……………you could not expect me in all good conscience to encourage that nonsense when i beat up on both parties equally, how do you think that would make me look when i know there are other West Indians and Bajans who also work in the banking system in Europe and North America and actually are aware of what is happening in the financial world and are not delusional and they also check out these blogs. I have an image to upkeep.

    Like

  52. Well Well May 5, 2013 at 7:51 PM #

    PDC………………i will leave you with some food for thought, if the Barbados Central Bank has the most sovereign power over the banks in Barbados, why can the FBI, SEC or IRS issue a John Doe summons on any bank in Barbados or the region to see what is going on in their books??………why can’t the very sovereign Barbados Central Bank tell these entities go fly a kite, you cannot just march in and look at our books………i bet you as PM in Bim you would think you could do that and only succeed in getting yourself extradited………..it is not as simple as you believe and trying your best to make others believe that madness is counterproductive to what you are claiming.

    Like

  53. Well Well May 5, 2013 at 7:57 PM #

    I don’t think that even you would expect them to name every participating member or country in the world………..i believe Barbados is considered part of the worldwide scenario, unless the island is now stationed on Jupiter.

    “to enhance understanding of key supervisory issues and improve the quality of banking supervision worldwide”. It is said – by the research information we saw – that some of its other functions are to frame guidelines and standards in different areas such as international standards on capital adequacy, the concordat on cross border banking, etc.

    Like

  54. PLANTATION DEEDS FROM 1926-2013 AND SEE MASSIVE FRAUD ,LAND TAX BILLS AND NO DEEDS May 6, 2013 at 3:14 PM #

    Government Needs to Protect Small Businesses@ Government Needs to Protect it own self from the rest of the World , The rest of the World is at the shores of Barbados looking to do what Barbados dont do.
    Audits will be done , BLP/DLP have no time for small business .Both Parties will see how well they hold up to outside eyes,
    Every Crook for them self.
    BARBADOS TODAY MIGHT BE THE ONLY NEWS IN BARBADOS TO TELL THE WORLD WHAT THE OTHER MEDIA OUTLETS WILL NOT PRINT. OR CNN.

    Like

  55. PLANTATION DEEDS FROM 1926-2013 AND SEE MASSIVE FRAUD ,LAND TAX BILLS AND NO DEEDS May 11, 2013 at 2:59 AM #

    What does UCC1-207 meaning ? on the back of a check , ,,,and then sign it.

    Any one can jump in to reply..Thank You. Banking question

    Like

Join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,436 other followers