Mia Mottley trying to stamp out corruption within the BLP Barbados Labour Party

“You do not have to be a rocket-scientist to realise that Mia Mottley seems to be trying to stamp-out corruption within the BLP but that decision has placed her squarely on a collision course with the old-boys club and the very persons who are responsible for the corruption.”

Can “One man, one vote” stamp-out BLP corruption?

by “O”

As an independent observer, I think Sunday Sun Columnist Albert Brandford might have got it all wrong this week (see his column: Sunday Sun, June 5, 2011). I now clearly understand why Social Media has ruled Traditional Media, obsolete. Social Media, for the most part, is being driven by young people: a new generation, who have found an innovative way to communicate, which seems to have given them the freedom of expression, they are comfortable with. This is a new generation who are not willing to turn a-blind-eye towards corruption. Mia Mottley therefore seems aware that going into the next election, the BLP will have a major problem!

Talk what you like – Mia Mottley is, therefore, pure class, in that the woman seem to have a vision, while her reformist philosophy is also a commendable attempt to re-position the 72-year-old BLP, to win. How can you fault her for that? The point must not be lost that it was Mia Mottley (a then 28-year-old Minister of Education) who introduced technology into schools in Barbados.

Therefore, what is Mia Mottley’s reformist agenda all about? To find the answer, Albert Brandford would have to have asked himself: despite the alleged life threatening change in healthcare, despite the state of the economy – what is the one issue, which the DLP is likely to use against the BLP (with credibility) during the upcoming general election campaign? The answer would again have to be :corruption.” There has never been a time in its 72-year-old history when the BLP can be said to be as corrupt as it is now under its present leadership. This explains the clash between the new leadership of the BLP and the Stalwarts, who too are being ignored in their attempt to tell the BLP, pull back. Barbadians want competent governance but they equally want, honest government!

"Campaign Donation" deposited to Prime Minister Owen Arthur's personal bank account.

Many will willingly admit that the BLP was removed from office because of allegations of corruption and that it really did not help the BLP’s case when the late David Thompson was able to produce a cheque to emphasize his charge. Owen Arthur was seriously wounded long before the campaign started. In fact, from the night he was forced by Thompson to bring debate on the Budget, to an abrupt end, Arthur became a liability to the BLP.

Now in Opposition, it does not help the BLP’s image when in the very Nation newspaper, there are front page stories, with images of voter rigging and other forms of electoral fraud. It is hardly a pretty sight when people willingly admit that they never made any attempt to join the BLP but have received letters confirming their membership. Call it what you like, that is corruption. A year has since passed yet not a word from the leadership of the BLP.

Then there is the “Prior Park Accord,” or the deal which was worked out between Owen Arthur and George Payne, the man who has been fingered as being head of the BLP’s elaborate Ponzi scheme. It should make anybody nervous that if now in Opposition and Arthur is so willing to cut deals in his interest, think what will again happen during what he describes as his ‘second coming.’ The new generation finds this type of conduct, vulgar and offensive!

So an element of the BLP was corrupt in Government; it is also now corrupt in Opposition but wants the people of Barbados to vote for it so that what? It can continue its corrupt practice? Is that it? How could that be fair to the new clean candidates the BLP is running? This seems to be what Mia Mottley’s reforming philosophy is all about. It seems clear that her reformist agenda and crusade for change started with her putting new, fresh; clean candidates in place early.

You do not have to be a rocket-scientist to realise that Mia Mottley seems to be trying to stamp-out corruption within the BLP but that decision has placed her squarely on a collision course with the old-boys club and the very persons who are responsible for the corruption. It seems obvious that Mia Mottley had the option to close ranks and keep her mouth shut. That most certainly would have caused her to find favour and be popular among the corrupt element. That she opted to speak-out and finds herself sandwiched between Arthur/Payne and the gang of five – means that the only persons she can sensibly turn to in order to force change, is the rank-and-file, hence her: “one man one vote,” re-engineering agenda.

The issue seems quite simple to me: Mia Mottley is on a crusade to stamp-out corruption within the BLP but powerful people seem determine to put obstacles in her way, in their own interest. Are Barbadians going to wait until the next BLP Conference to appear surprise when they read that the BLP’s voters list has again been rigged? This cannot be solely a BLP issue because every year, the BLP receives $150,000 from the public purse to run its affairs. Don’t panic! Given my many years, I have never seen an easier DLP campaign on a silver platter. I kid you not!

Editor’s note: This article was received anonymously and is published with no changes to wording or formatting. One speeling mistake was corrected. 😉

The main headline and subtitles are created by Barbados Free Press. Photos supplied from BFP archives and The Bajan Reporter

Further Reading

We encourage our readers to visit The Nation to take in Albert Brandford’s article HOWEVER seeing as that paper regularly deletes past articles and modifies history, we’re going to reprint the article here. We wouldn’t have to do that if The Nation didn’t try to change history to suit whatever political agenda they currently favour. Besides – The Nation has stolen our writing without attribution in the past. At least we give them credit!

So visit the Nation to read the article please, but when it disappears, you’ll find it here…

Mia’s move not at the best time

BY ALBERT BRANDFORD | SUN, JUNE 05, 2011 – 12:00 AM

In the context of serious Opposition politics, the recent repeated call for a change to the Barbados Labour Party’s (BLP) constitution by former Leader of the Opposition Mia Mottley seems, if not ill-conceived, then certainly ill-timed and loaded with self-interest.

Its reintroduction comes at a time when the Government is under its greatest pressure to date, with regard to its health care policy, a persistent recession and unassured leadership.

The stated issues relate to the timing of Mottley’s suggestion which seems chosen more in an attempt to refocus the Opposition moreso than to maintain the focus on the Government.

The Barbados Labour Party’s annual conference is far away (in political years!) and this issue certainly cannot be a priority for the membership or the public at this time.

As I understand it, the proposed change is intended to give ordinary members of the party the right to vote within the institution. As it stands now, the annual conference of the BLP is a delegates’ conference, and by the way, so too is the annual conference of the ruling Democratic Labour Party (DLP).

It is through this mechanism that BLP leaders have been chosen in the past, including Mottley herself, without any pledge on her accession to reform the process then.

In theory, this suggests that each member at an annual delegates’ conference would be representing ten members from the branches.

Let us be clear: no politician wants change that goes against self-interest. So it must be concluded that Mottley expects to gain by having the ordinary members participate fully in the party’s decision-making, especially in its choice of leader. This view is confirmed by her statement: “I have the trust in you, the ordinary members of the BLP, to be able to make decisions in the interest of the party . . . .”

Indeed, she made it known that come October she would be seeking the chairmanship of the party, currently held by St Andrew MP George Payne, one of the so-called “Gang of Five” responsible for her ouster some months ago as Opposition Leader.

Her conceiving of such a move at this time is interesting and instructive because it is customary for the leadership of the two major political parties to fall into the hands of the political leaders on the approach of a general election.

In the context of her apparent desire to “heal” the BLP following the bruising battle with the Parliamentary Group, perhaps assuming the post of chairmanship demands that she meet with the new political leader Owen Arthur, since in her own words, “the only way I know to heal and build trust is when four eyes meet . . .”.

In another breath, Mottley said Barbados was crying out for leadership and her way to that leadership seems to be chairmanship of the BLP, first and foremost.

Now the chairmanship is derived from the membership which is currently not allowed to fully participate in the voting and therefore her proposed change to the constitution, if passed, would secure for her a wider mandate.

Given that Barbados needs leadership which on the current performance of the Government has to come from the Barbados Labour Party, unless perhaps the leadership of the DLP changes, it is only fitting that whoever leads the two major parties has the best chance of leading the country. The conception is that simple.

There is an irony, however, in Barbadian politics that has played itself out in the last five years in the two parties. In the DLP, the man who took the party into the 2003 general election lost the leadership around mid-term. In the BLP, the man who took the party into the 2008 general election returned to the leadership just after mid-term.

In each case, the political leadership is derived from within Parliament in accordance with the country’s constitution.

The ultimate post in political leadership rests squarely with the elected members of Parliament on both sides of the House with respect to the offices of Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition.

While it is possible to change a party’s constitution to allow for widespread participation of its members in determining the presidency or the chairmanship, it is virtually impossible in our current parliamentary democracy to secure such widespread participation in determining national leadership.

In the circumstances, Mottley’s proposed change to the BLP’s constitution must be seen more in the context of its timing than its ability to transform the party before the next general election.

In this sense, there has to be an element of self-interest, since the constitutional realities, especially at the national level, cannot be lost on the former attorney general.

Recently, Mottley said she was not in politics looking for friendships. This is a given, since politicians are not known to have genuine friendships with their colleagues.

So what is it then that gets politicians to focus? The answer is power. So what is power, you might ask?

The answer is that thing which allows the individual to have influence in the pursuit of self-interest. So what is ultimate power? The answer is being Prime Minister.

It was said by a very prominent local politician that all politicians who entered elective politics should have the ambition to become prime minister. While the observation may be somewhat exaggerated, there is no doubt that some politicians are in the game to satisfy that want – nothing less will suffice.

In the pursuit of such a want, it must be recognized that there is a collective want that exceeds that of any one individual; this collective want is formed by the loyal base of a party.

The major difference between the loyal base and that of the individual politician is that the former is prepared to suppress its self-interest once it senses an opportunity for victory.

The preferences of the loyal base would always reveal more than one potential leader but the desires of the loyal base would always see one political opponent.

It is in the context above that the recent comments of the former Opposition Leader seem, if not ill-conceived, then certainly ill-timed and loaded with self-interest.


Advertisements

17 Comments

Filed under Barbados, Corruption, Political Corruption, Politics, Politics & Corruption

17 responses to “Mia Mottley trying to stamp out corruption within the BLP Barbados Labour Party

  1. Anonymous

    It would be good to know that Mia was not involved in any bad practices related to a number of projects/ negotiations such as:
    Edutech
    ABC Highway
    Dodds Prison
    Cable and Wireless Negotiations
    South Coast Sewerage Project
    I for one would be happy to support her if I can be satisfied that she too was not corrupt.

  2. J. Payne

    What I** don’t** want to see from BLP if they are returned to power.
    -Vast selling off of anymore government assets (“Family silver”) for peppercorn rates. (BNB is proof that if the government had hired the right CEO in the first place the bank could have been turned around.)
    -Ignoring the immigration laws of Barbados.
    -Seemingly non-transparent awarding of government contracts.
    -Changing vast aspects of the Constitution without referendum. (Barbados is in the same boat as when it had the JCPC. It is still under a foreign based court.)
    -Signing contracts that lock Barbados in something without well thought out provisions that can trigger renegotiations under reasonable circumstances. (Dodds, Ionics Freshwater, LIME, Oil pipeline to Trinidad. Reportedly as debated in T&T’s parliament there may only 25 more years of proven oil left in TnT. The pipeline will take years to build, and once testing is done how much will pass through that pipe before Trinidad is all out? Enough to pay for the cost savings it provided? probably not!)

  3. Pingback: Comment on Barbados Advocate Editorial: Islam, Rastafarianism are “extremist religions” by Selassie I | Barbados news

  4. Everyone Loves Rayside

    This is nothing but the whole truth;

    For sometime now, evil persons have sought repeatedly to attribute blame to Mrs Marquetta Rayside, wife of Keith Rayside Snr, for the demise of the Rayside Group of companies.

    She has been accused of stripping the group of companies of its financial assets since assuming the office of Chief Executive Officer in 2005.

    However, in this expose, this writer hopes to apportion blame where it is rightfully due.

    Are Barbadians aware that prior to his marriage to this beautiful young lady, the group of companies was heavily indebted to the VAT Office, the National Insurance Scheme and Inland Revenue?

    Are Barbadians aware that the group of companies was facing major challenges in servicing their bank loans having secured overdraught facilities carrying interest rates as high as 14 per cent in some cases?

    Are Barbadians aware that on many occasions funds due to the company for work done for government agencies were garnished in an attempt to collect arrears due to the government agencies identified above?

    How can anyone strip a company of its financial assets when its bankers and government agencies were keeping a keen eye on its financial dealings?

    Are Barbadians aware that following the receipt of a multi-million dollar settlement after the company’s take over by CLICO, the chief beneficiaries were Keith Rayside’s nine children, a former wife and his grand-children? Even though Marquetta was his lawful wife at the time, she was unaware that Mr Rayside had established a joint account with one of his daughters at the Barbados National Bank at Warrens, St Michael.

    Barbadians may be unaware that Rayside’s children and grand –children had unimpeded access to the company’s fuel tank at its Green Hill, St Michael headquarters.

    Identified below are some of the major financial excesses entered into by Keith Rayside to appease his contentious children, grand-children and a former wife:

    (1) The joint account was a Club 55 plus Chequing account;
    (2) At all times the funds on the joint account were to be managed and used by his daughter and Rayside Snr;
    (3) The sum of one thousand dollars ($1000 per week) was to be paid to Ione Rayside a former wife of Rayside Snr;
    (4) From February 2006, the sum of Bds $5000 per month was to be paid to Dwayne Rayside, Rayside Snr, son who resided in Florida, USA;
    (5) On May 26 2006, the sum of Bds $15 000 was paid to Juliette Payne the mother of Dwayne Rayside for his maintenance;
    (6) On November 2 2006 the sum of Bds$50 000 was paid to Juliette Payne for the maintenance of Dwayne Rayside;
    (7) Rayside Snr and his daughter agreed that she would retain the cheque book in respect of the Club 55 Plus joint account, and all statements in respect thereof were to be delivered to her premises in Christ Church. At all times she operated the Club 55 Plus joint account freely;
    (8) The Club 55 Plus joint account was subsequently changed to a Major League Joint Account on or about June 15, 2007;
    (9) On May 14, 2008 Rayside’s Snr daughter deposited on Butterfield Bank a cheque for the sum of Bds $4 333 330.50 representing the proceeds of the sale by Rayside Holdings Ltd of its 1 728 241 shares in Rayside Construction Ltd into the Major League Joint Account at the BNB;
    (10) On or about June 4 2008, the sum of $400 000 was paid to Keith Rayside Jnr for his absolute use. This was in addition to $200 000 which represented his one per cent share in Rayside Construction Ltd;
    (11) On or about June 2008, the sum of Bds $100 000 was given to Dwayne Rayside for his absolute use and benefit;
    (12) On or about May 28, 2008 Rayside Snr agreed to make cash gifts to his daughters and grand children of Bds $ 2 000 000 from funds on the said Major League Joint Account;
    (13) While Rayside Snr’s children and grand-children were benefiting from these golden handshakes, he advanced his wife, Marquetta of many years a loan of Bds$200 000 under a legally binding arrangement which stipulated that the sum was to be deducted from her share of the husband’s estate.

    Armed with this information the general public of Barbados can now determine who were responsible for the bankruptcy of a once successful black business-house.

    It should be noted that Mrs Rayside only became aware of these disbursements after they were completed. Please be reminded that this writer has plenty of information on this sordid saga.

  5. Son Of Spam

    That is all well & good, wunnuh hear that Wade Gibbons from Nation was severed? Is that why you used this caption? Was he fired for the story Ian Bourne aired late last year? Shouldn’t Ian have kept his blasted mouth shut? I hope you happy hear?

  6. Ryan

    The irony of it all. Once Mia Mottley sat in that same old boys club in very prominent positions where she could have influenced change. She was the Attorney General, she did nothing to stamp out the corruption. She was the Deputy Prime Minister, she gave no indication that their was corruption. As leader of the opposition, she did not apologise or try to make amends for the many acts of corruptions. All of a sudden she has an Epiphany and her hands are washed clean.

    One thing we know is that power corrupts. If Ms. Mottley’s epiphany has occured because she was removed from the vanguard. Maybe that is the best place for her to reside and this time and continue to make her high level contributions on policy. The closer she gets to power the less important these high and mighty speeches become.

    With regard to Mr. Brandford’s article. This stance taken by Ms. Mottley is simply to use her popularity to capture the position by any means necessary. Moving from delegates to one man one vote would in no way change the level of accountability or reduce the level or corruption or improve democracy within the BLP labour party. It would simply mean that the man with the fattest purse stands a better chance of getting the majority vote. The most popular candidate would win, or the individual who can mobilise the largest support base will win. It does not correlate to an improve man of values and influx of novel ideas or a change of the status quo.

    If Ms. Mottley intends to to rid the BLP of corruption. I wish her well. Let him who is without sin cast the first stone. For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. Let that change begin with you.

    Yes I do agree with the comment at the end. Sometimes the Bajan Reporter needs to shut up. Stop trying to be the first to break the news. But look at the impact of the news. Come on this is not journalism this is gossip. We need journalist and responsible reporters.

  7. Patchwork

    Politicians need to stop taking Bajans for fools but then again some of us need to stop being so easily impressed as clearly our memories are too short . This move by Mottley is by no means fuelled by an interest to empower the “ordinary man” in the party but by the desire to once again be in the seat of power.

    Mottley would love to be Prime Minister yet when she first became Leader of the Opposition, for all her years in active politics, she still had a lot of growing up to do (still does). Following her ouster, her newest tactic is to go around making statements to appear like she is taking the high road on issues using terms like “non-partisan” and “for the good of Barbados”. Ms. Mottley clearly sees the joke in al of this as if you watch her closely, after making such mature statements, she has a good giggle/laugh like even she can’t believe that she is being taken so seriously by some.

    It is a pity that all this “for the good of Barbados” theme did not actually guide her when she was in Owen Arthur’s Cabinet signing off on the worst decisions made by that administration to the detriment of Barbados.

  8. Colourless Kaleidoscope

    It is actually laughable that Mia is trying to stamp out corruption in the BLP. Mia cannot single- handedly stamp out or eradicate a phenomena which has taken up permanent residence in the confines of the party. Her chairmanship bid is just another pity cloud that she is willing to ride on. It may seem as if it is good intentioned and Mia will appear as if she has the best interest of the country at heart but judging from how she handled the whole ousting saga, Mia clearly is not ready to play hardball.

    Before she seeks to stamp out corruption in the party, she needs to prove to the country that her hands are in fact clean.

  9. Green Monkey King

    It seems Bajan Reporter offended Ryan’s Bee sensitivities, if Ryan was in debt I’d say he’s truly Owen someone? In December, Bourne aired Wade Gibbon’s question from since October which the Nation didn’t use – a question that everyone still wants to know!

    IF THOMPSON WAS NOT ON A DEATHBED (As Arthur himself says so nastily at many BLP meetings now, poor sport, old man – perhaps you need less sauce before you make a speech?) WOULD OWEN & THE REST OF THE GANG OF 5 BEEN IN A HURRY TO SHOVE MIA ASIDE?

  10. Peter Pan

    BFP, your headline at the top SCREAMS….
    “Mia Mottley trying to stamp out corruption within the BLP Barbados Labour Party !”

    Judging from the photo shot on the back page of the Nationnews 6th June , 2011…….We are left with no doubt the Mia has indeed…..embraced the CORRUPT one…Owen Arthur !

  11. They are at it even out of office ?

    Please find the story of the missing $ 500,000.00 that Mr Roger Smith is to be charged for the theft of, this was confirmed by Owen See Thru Arthur that he did indeed know of the theft and he did confirm that it was Muttley’s selected person and not one of his selected persons carrying out the crime, he was glad to see that Smith has displayed his colours very early, seems like Roger Smith was only trying to follow the pattern that He owing laid out when he was in office.

    http://www.barbadostoday.bb/launch.aspx?referral=other&pnum=&refresh=5Zt0Jg170G6r&EID=92814393-3da3-43fe-9933-22abb0fe355f&skip=true

  12. Green Monkey King

    What nonsense are you spreading? The Half Million missing at Sagicor is not the same which dwindled due to expenses at the BLP… It’s Owen or George Payne who you need to ask about “Steel In There” and why Elders REALLY stopped their subventions!

  13. Johnny Postle

    If she is trying to stamp out corruption as your article is trying to purport then it means that she is not part of the corruptive circle. Now the truth of the matter is that I find that hard to believe. I believe that Mia Mottley is a good politician who represents Barbados well and is the future face of politics in this country. But I also believe that there is some truth to her involvement in corruption and as such she is presents three faces: one of which I believe to be a rogue; the second the face of youth, freshness,intellectual ability and appeal to the younger supporting masses of this country; the third being the ‘fuel’ that has increased the fire of allege corruption in the BLP camp. I do not think none in the BLP can say that they did not get their pockets greased over the 14 years that they ruled. Neither do I expect any politician from either side to confess to their transgressions and the sins to which the people believe they have not or are committing. But what is obvious is that you do not accumulate the type of wealth that besets some members of both sides by saving part of your politicians salary for the numbers years that you were/are in power. You do not have to be a rocket science to figure out the science behind politicians riches.

  14. Ryan

    @ Green Monkey King

    Maybe it was a top up

  15. Anonymous

    The question then becomes , the level and degree of her corruption compared to others. Did she just turn a blind eye or did she collect millions by engaging in corrupt acts?

  16. observer

    When everyone talking about corruption in The BLP camp, what about the present government corruption. What about CLICO, has people forgotten that already. The people who invested have not received their monies back yet. What about CBC, you pay for a package, not antenna, no remote control, no box, have to wait three months or more. What about the minister of housing $10,000 to 15, 000:00 per house he receives. Yes fluch out corruption, but flush it out of both parties.

  17. “observer” is right – When I was at CBC, I paid for six months out of my salary on Multi-Choice from Dec 96 to Apr 97 and ordered for the direct deductions to stop until I actually got service, there was no installation until Aug 97 just days before the morbid coverage of late P’cess Diana’s death via E! Entertainment and I am still waiting for Playboy channel which never arrived…