Why Prime Minister Stuart never mentions Freedom of Information legislation anymore

DLP thick as thieves with Parris, Duprey, CLICO & CL Financial

by Nevermind Kurt

It is readily apparent to anyone without a political agenda that the introduction in Parliament of the DLP’s promised Integrity Legislation was strategically withheld for the last four years so the DLP could again use the issue in the coming election. Their lies fooled the voters last time, so why not use the same technique again?

The obvious plan is to have the legislation ‘almost’ make it through this session of Parliament, but not be declared as law. That has been the intent all along: to have the legislation stillborn so a/ the current government would not have to conform to integrity rules, and b/ the current government can now say “We almost made it except for the damn Opposition. Give us one more term to finish it.”

Fool me once, etc…

How quickly the electorate forgets that the DLP promised to introduce Integrity Legislation and Freedom of Information within the first 100 days. The DLP also promised to introduce a Ministerial Code including conflict of interest guidelines “immediately upon forming a government”. That code was to have been a policy declaration and could have been implemented on the very first day as promised.

Leroy Parris and good friend Finance Minister Chris Sinckler share champagne

The DLP didn’t introduce any of these promises because as it turned out Prime Minister David Thompson and his gang were thick as thieves with Leroy Parris and Lawrence Duprey of CLICO and CL Financial infamy. It also turned out that David Thompson and his law firm were money-laundering for Parris. (That’s the auditors talking, not us, and you can read about it here.)

Under those situations and many more questionable activities of the DLP, it’s no wonder that the current government didn’t keep its promises concerning integrity legislation. A big part of the DLP/CLICO/Parris/Duprey relationship would have immediately become illegal under the new legislation and there’s no way that Thompson or Stuart would permit that.

So the DLP leadership lied to get elected and then delayed, delayed, delayed integrity rules until the DLP was well into its fifth year of majority government when the designed-to-be-stillborn legislation could be produced again at the right moment like a rabbit from a magician’s hat.

What happened to the Freedom of Information Act?

Prime Minister Stuart has been in the papers recently pulling out the Integrity Legislation, telling folks “It’s coming!” and setting up the public so the DLP won’t be blamed when the legislation doesn’t make it into declared law in time for the next election. Stuart fully intends that the promised integrity legislation “almost made it!” will be an asset, not a liability during the coming election.

But he never mentions Freedom of Information anymore.

The reason that the DLP never mentions FOI is that the thieving politicians know that Freedom of Information is the key to making the integrity legislation a real threat to the way things are ’bout hey.

Freedom of Information legislation gives ordinary citizens an easy and economical means to legally force the government to provide copies of documents and information that citizens need to hold officials accountable. Integrity Legislation isn’t much use if you can’t force the government to surrender the paperwork that proves offences. Stuart and the DLP know this and THAT is why FOI became a non-subject.

Look at the plight of David Weekes – and know why the Government hates Freedom of Information

David Weekes is an ordinary Bajan man trying to sue the CARICOM government and the cartels that run this place. PM Stuart won’t provide him with the CARICOM ratification documents he needs for his case. These are documents that every citizen should have a right to see, but the Barbados government is denying them to Weekes to spoil his case… and some people are so upset with Weekes that he believes (and we do to) they tried to burn down his home. With no Freedom of Information legislation and process, ordinary citizen Weekes has no effective means of forcing the government to provide the public documents that he needs.

That’s why the BLP and DLP elites and their cartel cronies have never implemented any kind of Freedom of Information rules and process: they desperately want to keep information out of the hands of citizens.

The thieving politicians simply don’t want the little people to become empowered by knowledge and access to public documents.

And that, my friends, is exactly why the DLP will not implement Freedom of Information and why the Opposition BLP is silent too.

Nevermind Kurt

Further Reading about Barbados political elites and (cough, cough) ‘integrity’

September 24, 2011: Prime Minister Owen Arthur “invested” YOUR money in Nigeria. A predictable result.

August 28, 2011: We told you so! Integrity Legislation buried in a dark hole

October 17, 2009: Prime Minister Thompson’s new strategy for avoiding Integrity Legislation, FOI

Advertisements

14 Comments

Filed under Barbados, Corruption, Ethics, Freedom Of Information, Political Corruption, Politics & Corruption

14 responses to “Why Prime Minister Stuart never mentions Freedom of Information legislation anymore

  1. robert ross

    On the question of ‘integrity’ – the post writer asserts as fact what BFP has already recently stated is conjecture in relation to a certain matter – and that is, to say the least, irresponsible. It was, moreover, unnecessary for the purposes of the post itself and the case study cited.

  2. BFP

    Hi Robert Ross,

    Marcus here.

    You know what I love about blogs vs traditional news media? Here I am in the wee hours of the morning and I posted a story submitted by Kurt. One of our very attentive readers (you) found a problem with a sentence in the post and alerted us. I’ve changed it to clarify that it is Mr. Weekes’ and BFP’s conclusion that the nighttime firebomb attack was actually directed at the Weekes residence (as opposed to an established fact with arrests etc).

    Thanks very much for keeping BFP accurate and responsive to our readers.

    Marcus

  3. PLANTATION DEEDS FROM 1926 UP TODAY A ND SEE MASSIVE FRAUD ,

    Why Prime Minister Stuart never mentions
    Freedom of Information legislation anymore,,,,,,Because they all will be broke,
    THIS IS THE KEY/ CODE .
    BLP,DLP/CLICO/Parris/Duprey,PM, AG,POLICE,JUDGE, JUSTICE, LAWYERS , CHURCH MINISTER, LAW FIRMS, relationship.
    It will show where all the monies came from,, The .Plantations DEEDs
    They can not be crooks without taking something , hiding something and then doing something.
    Freedom of Information legislation will allow us ALL to see the ROOT Title and the true ownership of these CONVEYANCE. DLP AND the BLP , then the BLP and the BLP have to cover each others back taking turns in office. But still to fool the people. Kent , Sandy Lane, Kensington , Black rock,Providence,Goodland,Buttals,Bank Hall,and many more , Being cut up and sold to fuel the greed of the parties, friends, lawyers MPs, and more ,
    If you think not,, try Yo find them , try to get a true copy, All of them to be recorded at the land registry, or the BARBADOS ARCHIVES. Then only then will you learn why every thing is SO out of wack , Lets see if any investigative Reporter can find the smoking gun.When you all ready We will bring the Proof , Same Proof the Fraud Squad have but then hide by order of the Head of Police and the PM and A/G…….

    That’s why the BLP and DLP elites and their cartel cronies have never implemented any kind of Freedom of Information rules and process: they desperately want to keep information out of the hands of citizens (BFP)
    VOTE BAJAN FREE PARTY ,,, AND SEE THE ALL THE BOOKS AT THE OVAL. FREE ENTRY.

  4. robert ross

    @ Marcus

    Sorry I didn’t move away later – we could have had a chat. BUT I must confess that in one sense I was wrong in my comment above. The post DID say it was a ‘belief’, shared by BFP. I misread. But the reason for the misreading was simply that the key phrase “burnt down his home” was italicized and underlined and so my old eyes focussed on that rather than what preceded it. This was negligent of me. BUT if I with in a sense trained eyes for words (albeit all too heavily cataracted) can focus on the wrong thing so can all sorts of people from China to Peru who are reading here. The result is that ‘his home was firebombed’ becomes part of the folklore which people speak of as if it were established fact. And that is bad in every sese. Likewise the post might have explained that it was not in fact DW’s home that was the immediate target of the attack in fact (if not in intention). And remember, we have not really explored the ‘attack’ evidentially. Eg there are only three homes in DW’s cul de sac – the place would have been sussed out first – so that if this was a ‘real’ attack rather than, say, a warning, the bombers would have to be totally incompetent. Now that in itself might identify the attack as government inspired of course.
    But as I say, it wasn’t really necessary to mention the ‘attack’ at all for the purposes of the post – which continues to make a very, very important point.
    BTW, I have never quite understood why it was necessary to have sight of the instruments of ratification. It has been puzzling me this morning. In Barbados the Treaty of Chaguaramas was legislated upon so that sight of the instrument of ratification which would have been lodged with CARICOM was unnecessary. I haven’t seen any explanation – and, of course, I’m not saying there isn’t one.

    And thankyou, Marcus, very much for being sensitive to our comments.

    One other thing. For myself, I would be very happy to join with DW on April 18 (?) to show solidarity with him when his house is sold and, if necessary, to hold a placard – and this whatever the merits of his legal case. Would others join me do you think? I’m assuming it would be acceptable to DW.

  5. 189

    Prime Minister Stuart never mentions Freedom of Information legislation anymore, because, you never mentions freedom when dealing with slaves ,, Do you think he looks at Bajans as his equal?

  6. FUMBLEDELL!
    You WILL be removed from power for you lack of strength and leadership!
    RedJet, Clico, British American, the list goes on!
    You have allowed the enemies of Barbados, namely Trinidad, Jamaica and now Antigua to rape and pillage the treasure of this country at their will and fancy while you sat idly by and watched with your disgusting grimmace, no doubt thinking to yourself how spectacular and intellectually superior than the rest of us you happen to be.
    Politics as usual here is done! Plain and simple! ‘We will speak soon enough, and you and the cast of clown who follows blindly in your footsteps will hear us loud and clear!”

  7. rastaman

    @The Watcher: Could not have said it better BUT will it happen?

  8. 32535834/24346-C66

    I hardly think that Trinidad, Jamaica and Antigua should be characterised
    as “enemies of Barbados”, even though that is likely how most Bajans see life from here at the Centre of The Universe.

    Barbados exposes its vulnerable underbelly to outsiders with financial means, and is taken advantage of.
    This is about money, and a good deal when it comes up,
    not about war per se.

    …………………..

    But that aside, Fru is history -just like how all Dep. PMs that inherited the post by accident ..are History.
    Talk to Sandie, talk to Bree, both History.
    Poor Fru would have to be a giant, a man among men, to pull it off
    but he isn’t made of that stuff, God bless his humble heart.
    I suspect he’s a nice guy, intelligent and all, but he simply isn’t the sorta son-of-a-birch needed to run a country (not an easy task).

    Owen now…daz a different story! lol

  9. PLANTATION DEEDS FROM 1926 UP TODAY A ND SEE MASSIVE FRAUD ,

    The Watcher, rastaman

    Trinidad, Jamaica and Antigua = offshore banks

  10. Mark Fenty

    “Watcher”
    Watcher, I hope that we can once again view Trinidad, Jamaica, and Antigua, as friends who share our common struggles, and have our best interest at heart, and not our quondam antagonist who are aiming to undermining us as a nation.

  11. Mark Fenty

    “Watcher”
    Remember now Watcher, we are now living in the global age, and with the invention of the global economy comes innovative ways of doing business. Critics in the United States of America have advanced the same argument, their have argued that the America, has sold out to Mexico, China, and India, because the manufacturing industry all but disappeared in this part of the world.

  12. Newbie

    No one in power especially PM Stuart wants to derail THE GRAVY TRAIN that is why there have been no recent mumbling about freedom of information or integrity legislation, IF only he would yell ALL ABOARD, I could live with that.

  13. 189

    Why Prime Minister Stuart never mentions Freedom of Information legislation anymore,
    crooks dont tell on them self , you have to catch another crook to tell on another crook.

  14. Mark Fenty

    It is important that we make it perfectly clear, that the job of a politician is to faithfully execute collective will of the people, and not to enrich his or he self through the instruments of government.

    Surely, when the leaders of a democracy betrays the interest of the people, this demoralizes their faith in government, and undermines the very confidence there have had in the political process.

    Clearly, those who command our highest office are held at a much higher standard of judgment, and rigorous scrutiny than the rest of society; but if there no clear guideline, and standardized procedures / (checks and balances) to arrest the improprieties of those in office, what good it the system of democracy.

    Worse yet, they audacious mendacities which inflames the collective conscience of the masses, is a common occurrence in the world of politics. In fact, this practice has been interwoven in the political thinking; through the art of persuasive demagoguery and enticing grandiloquence from the days of Aristotle’s Republic.

    But there can be little doubts that the electorate is led to believe, through their own ingenuous naivety that our political leaders can’t do any wrong.

    Interestedly, the electorate has a propensity, and predisposition to put leaders on a pedestal that lies beyond clutch of human infallibility. Until those leaders who are the chosen custodians and trustees of the nation’s ideals, subvert those same ideals.

    It should be pointed out also, that everywhere in human society, when examining the collective mental apparatus of the electorate, even in the most remote corner of the globe. One finds a common trend emerging, there is community of semantic illiterates being bamboozle in the hands of the political ventriloquist.

    But the question which looms largely in the collective mind of the electorate should be this. Do we follow our intuitive conscience as Rousseau suggest, or should we capitulate to a silver tongue devil whose merely intention is to further his self-interest?

    Dr. Carl Jung the counterpart to Simon Faust has made a rather interesting observation, he contends that, “When the individual understands the duality of his nature, his capacity for good as well as evil, then he can understand, and cope with the potential threat of those in power.” The
    Dr. Jung is clear speaking here, about the human condition which escapes none of us.

    Sadly enough, but nonetheless a reality in our present time, has invaded the collective conscience of man. A psychological egoism has given birth to self- interest over the collective good, but against this backdrop, a very small clan of politicians has managed to escapes the frame of mind, and hold tight to their moral convictions. The late President John F. Kennedy has described in his book Prolife in Courage the uncommon courage, and testicular fortitude, of men who ignore the special interest, partisan politics, and national interest and vote their conscience know full well that there was going to be on the line.

    Finally, there is one justifiable explanation which points to why some leaders undermine the public confidence, and Montesquieu articulates it this way. He said that, “There never has been a real democracy, and we’ll never be.” Too often we are deceived in our minds in to believing that politicians aren’t salient beings like the rest of us, who are subject to the same: blames, praises, rewards, punishments, hopes, dreams, impulse, and failings.