Trafficking Of Women In Barbados

Our friend Titilayo of Gallimaurfry Blog is writing a post each day for 16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence. She started on November 25th (International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women) and will end on December 10th (International Human Rights Day).

Most of us guys tend to ignore this sort of stuff as more shrill screeching from the man-hating feminazis. I have never, and would never, hit a woman myself. The only time I saw it happen in public, the boys and I had a little “chat” with the offender while Shona and her friends took the girl home.

But once again, we make a mistake if we think that everyone’s reality is like ours.

Never mind your thoughts of feminazis. Read Titilayo’s posts, starting with “We’re All The Poorer For It” Trafficking Of Women In Barbados.

Of Denial, Deception, Decline – And Soaping Young “Ladies” At The Pub: Richard Hoad’s View Of Barbados Independence

Somehow, we missed Richard Hoad’s view of 40 Years Of Barbados Independence as published in The Nation News.

Good for some thought and a bit of a chuckle. Maybe more than a chuckle… Don’t read the last bits with a mouthful of beer or it will come out your nose!

(Only thing we’d like to ask Richard is how he knew about the soaping at the pub?)

The Nation News: The Lowdown – They Sing No More

BLP Blog Endorses Censorship Of Blogs, Call-In Programmes

FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND BLOGGING

BLP’s official blog website endorses Mia Mottley’s proposal to the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association that call-in programmes and internet blogs should be reformed and placed under government control. i.e. State censorship. (BLP Blog article “Deputy PM Has Her Say” - link here)

Here is the BLP Blog wording; “We agree with the Deputy PM that the work of the conference (Commonwealth Parliamentary Association- Caribbean) should lead to a policy to reform the Westminster system so as to protect the credibility of our Parliaments.”

Amazingly this did not produce the same shocked reaction that Miss Mottley’s own words did. No attempt is made to explain in what way the “credibility of our Parliaments” is endangered by unfettered expression. What does “credibility of our Parliaments” mean exactly? Has frank comment on call-in shows caused our citizens to cease believing in our parliamentary democracy? I very much doubt it. What evidence is there?

Miss Mottley’s actual words are in part, as follows: “…For in the absence of that reform entities such as the call-in program which have no accountability to anyone and no modality to be able to ensure that there is transparency, or that there is indeed informed discussion- will continue to predominate.”

Miss Mottley’s meaning is hard to get to grips with because of the windy and bombastic way she expresses herself. Unlike Sen. Lynette Eastmond Miss Mottley seems incapable of speaking concisely and lucidly.

English or Mottleyish?

Whoever heard of such empty verbiage as “no modalities to be able to ensure that there is transparency”? Just look up the word “modality” and tell me what it means in this context. Meaningless rubbish!

If she meant “Call-in programmes are anonymous and unregulated and there is no way to ensure that statements made are accurate” why did she not say so?

Omitting the lengthy relative clause in the middle of her sentence, we have “Entities (call-ins and bloggers)…will continue to predominate.” “Predominate” is defined as “to exert controlling power or influence.” Is she seriously trying to tell us that call-in and blog comments are exerting controlling power and influence over our parliament?

Ms. Mottley is either deluding herself or exaggerating to the extreme for political intent.

If her party felt her words went too far, they could have tempered their support. Instead they come out in unqualified endorsement!

It is frightening to realise that the Deputy Prime Minister, slated before long to take over the reins of power, has bullied her party into accepting her inflated fears that healthy criticism poses a threat to the government of our nation.

What Could Bajans Expect From Prime Minister Mia Mottley?

The “reform of the Westminster system,” with or without the promised referendum, is likely to mean we are ruled by a President rather than a Prime Minister, with more autocratic powers. As the current Deputy Prime Minister, it is not inconceivable that Mia Mottley might someday end up being the President of the Republic of Barbados.

One regretfully concludes that behind her dictatorial rhetoric lies a threat to the civil liberties we cherish. If the public can see through the tsunami of portentous hot air to the veiled meaning of her words and sentiments they will feel the same way.

Our thanks to Barbados Free Press reader “M” for this well-written and insightful piece. M – if you’d like us to publish your real name – just drop us an email and we’ll credit you.

Thanks, M!

Story Links

BFP Article: Barbados Deputy Prime Minister Says Internet Blogs “Marginalize… Parliament”

Jamaica Observer Calls For Campaign Finance Law. The Nation News, Barbados, Calls For… ah…, er…

Should Barbados Have Campaign Finance Laws?

Or more correctly put: should COW Williams be able to donate as much as desired to any one candidate and skew the election by virtue of big money?

Dennis Morrison of The Jamaica Observer makes some good points about Jamaica’s campaign money problems in his article “PM Must Enact Campaign Finance Law“. Substitute the word “Barbados” for “Jamaica” and throw in a few of our corruption scandals instead of Jamaica’s, and you could easily print the article in The Nation News.

Except, of course, The Nation News wouldn’t print such an article as it might offend the government.

Here is an excerpt from The Jamaica Observer…

“One gap in Jamaica’s legislative framework, which would be seen as a big negative, is the absence of rules governing campaign financing. Societies that lack transparency in this matter are perceived as being highly susceptible to public sector corruption. The Trafigura affair reminded us that not only do we not have any rules and that there is total lack of transparency in this matter, but we have no position as to whether political contributions by foreigners are legal or illegal. In short, a key element of our democracy is operating without rules with respect to its funding.”

… Read the whole article at The Jamaica Observer (link here).