Moontown

Mr. D. St.,E. KELLMAN: Giving the poor people
land is giving away land, Mr. Speaker? The Minister of
Housing and Lands is telling me that giving poor people
land is giving away land.

Hon. G. W. PAYNE: Mr. Speaker, on a point of
order. I have not spoken since the Honourable Member got
up on his feet.
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: They tell me something
about siting a landfill is nothing to do with housing. Once
you are in housing anything is housing, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am saying that I am not in here to
represent anybody who can pay for anything. I am in here
to represent people who cannot afford to pay and who have
the right to acquire a piece of land in this country. So if the
front bench is telliqg me that they agree with the - mouthings of the Minister, say it. If they are saying that,
Mr. Speaker, let them say it.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: I have already stated it.
You are telling me, Sir, that if a piece of land in the City
is up for grabs that any and everybody can come and use
the price factor as the main factor. Let me give you an
example.

Suppose now the Honourable Member for the City
wanted a housing unit in the City and somebody because
they feel they have a lot of money offered the Minister of
Housing $5 million when 1 500 people could be housed
that we are going to take the $5 million and ignore the
1 500 poor people in this country?
Hon. Miss B. A. MILLER: Mr. Speaker, on a point
of order. The Barbados Labour Party is taking care of the
people in the City. The Pondside building will start before
the end of this year.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: You are worrying about
the City and not worrying about the poor people in St.
Thomas? I live in St. Thomas too so I have to defend them
then. I have to defend the people in St. Thomas and St.
Lucy. The same way you have a right, and I must
congratulate you for looking after the people of the City,
that is why I have a right to look after the poor people of
this country.

Mr. Speaker, this policy is a dangerous policy and I
know that you cannot agree with this, Mr. Speaker, because
the people in Bank Hall, Bush Hall and Quarry Road
would never get an opportunity to get a piece of the cake.
When Government property is up for grabs, Sir, I am
saying the price cannot be the only factor.
Mr. Speaker, I have a problem that the same way in
this country that Governments tend to use interest rates as
the only factor to borrow loans, now they are using the
price. You remember what happened to those Japanese
loans? Just because the interest rate was the factor and it L’
was low, they ran and borrowed the money and we ended
up paying over $60 million to the Japanese. That
foolishness must stop in this country. We must have
policies in this country that represent the interest of the
poor man as long as I am in here.
Let me tell you something. All those people who feel
that they have money and they want to sell us, let them
continue to try it. I will be fearless.
Aside.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN. Mr. Speaker, I am saying
that we have dealt with housing in this country, and I am - going into phase 2 now. We have a situation in this country
where housing lots were left in this country to be
developed and they have not been developed. There are
Ministers who want to attack the Honourable Member for
St. Lucy for not giving suggestions. I am going to say it in
here for the third time. I will give suggestions for lots in
St. Lucy when the ones at Mount Poyer are completed and
when the ones at Hope Road have been fairly allocated to
the people, but you cannot come in here and ask me to go
and identify areas so that you can come back later and tell
poor people that I took away their land from them.
I am saying, Sir, that we have an area that we
compulsorily acquired and when I say “we,” I mean the
Democratic Labour Party, at Mount Poyer for housing lots.
Nothing has been done about that. It happened in 1994 and
this is 1996 and you went on television and tell people that
you asked me for a recommendation and I have done
nothing about it? You asked me to supply roads. I have
supplied 40 roads in St. Lucy and I have not seen anything
done yet. Furthermore than getting the roads, I cannot even
.a
get a road repaired, and you are telling me about
suggestions? I will give suggestions and submissions, Mr.
Speaker, when I see action. But if you are going to make
me put pen to paper and waste money, I have no money to
waste. This is a serious time.
Mr. Speaker, Glendale in St. Thomas. I am saying
that we have to stop increasing the land bank of people in
Barbados and give every poor citizen the right in this
country to have a share of the cake. This thing where
people feel they can just come and dish out money and get
whatever they want, I am not party to that. When the poor
people start to get some of the goodies, I will support that,
Sir.
Thank you very much.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Mr. Speaker, I had no intention of speaking on this particular Act. But after listening to some speakers, I realize that this Act has serious implications for the Caribbean people. I was asking myself how far and how near we are to becoming a Banana Republic in the Caribbean. It seems to me that this Act deals with the upper level as if only the upper level has something to offer to the Caribbean people. I honestly believe, Sir, that some people will say that it is only a step in the right direction.

But I believe, Sir, that this Act needs to be more open-ended. I cannot see, Sir, how you can say that only certain people within the Caribbean have something to offer to the people or to the Caribbean. Am I to believe, Sir, that somebody qualified -when I say qualified, let me say a good chef or someone who can do things well within the hotel industry and because he did not go to the University of the West or he did not go to a university somewhere in the world that he has nothing to offer to the people of the Caribbean? Am I to believe that a good mason who has developed a technique of building structures a particular way that he must come and ask someone to get a work permit and just because someone else has a degree that person can just walk into another country and he is allowed to work without anybody interfering with him? Am I interpreting this Act wrong? If so, I am prep ared…
Aside.
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: I am not discussing the Honourable Member for St. Michael South. I am discussing the Act and I am discussing the Act in the way that I understand it. If I wrong, correct me. I am prepared to sit down and allow someone to get up on a point of order. I am saying that this as it stands, Sir, carries a bias against certain groups of people who have something to offer the Caribbean. I find it rather difficult, Sir, to support certain sections of this Act at this time because we are saying that we are going to support 15 per cent of the people of the Caribbean and the next 85 per cent we are going to have a problem in supporting them. It is a dangerous example, Sir, that we are setting and it is a precedent that I believe that we should not get involved in, Sir, especially at a time when we are for Caribbean unity.

You cannot have Caribbean unity, Sir, when you are saying that certain people are not going to be involved in certain things and that certain groups of people will have special privileges but the others must come and consult and give advice or do the work and they will not get any recognition. So I would like those few points clarified because I am difficulty with this Act as it stands, Sir. I believe that it is too tight. We need some flexibility in it, Sir, because I cannot sell this to my constituents neither can I it to my Caribbean brothers. Thank you very much.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Mr. Speaker, some time
ago a great Leader of this country once said that one day
we will wake up and we would not have land of our own.

When I heard that, Sir, I took him at his word, but
never did I think that I would have seen the day when I
would pick up a document and realise that in that
document was the evidence that some day the land of
Barbados would not be the land we knew before, it would
be all owned by foreigners and not by Barbadians.
When one looks at the land use policy one must cry.
One must ask if we are speaking about the same pain that
the Honourable Member was just speaking about. Sir, when
I think about land use policy I think about pain and the
only thing in this patticular case I think about is an
Honourable Pain. Mr. Speaker, Sir, I have heard about all
this pain and was forced to go to the Budgetary proposals
and I was forced to go to a section which dealt with the
patriarchs of Barbados, where these people were
congratulated for putting the economy in the position that
it is in today, where the private sector is bragging about
how much money they have on reserve, where the
Government is bragging about how much money that they
have in reserve but the poor workers cannot brag about
how much disposable income that they have to buy bonds,
shares or to invest in credit unions. Yet we have a proposal
in this Budget to give people the right to buy bonds, shares
and invest in credit unions.

One would know, Sir, that in order for someone to be
able to invest, one would have to have the necessary
disposable income to invest so you cannot bring proposals
to this Assembly where you are saying to poor people that
we want you to invest and how well we are looking after
your interest without giving you the necessary disposable
income to invest in those proposals that you speak about.
So, Sir, if I had to make an assumption on this
Budget I would have to say, Sir, this is a budget of pain
for the poor people of this country. I would have to say
this is a budget of hope and all of those proposals are for
1997 and my poor people will have to live on hope so that
they will be able to see 1997. But, do you know the most
disgraceful thing, Sir? By 1997 there will have to plan for
- the VAT for their funeral service because the pain that the Honourable Member spoke about will be on their backs
and then they will be asked to put aside some of the
disposable income that they do not have for the undertaker
to pay him some VAT.

Sir, we had some other speakers in here who said that
the economic problem of this country started in 1991. I
have already stated in this Assembly that it is not true and
I am asking you to turn with me to page 70 of the
Economic and Financial Statistics and I would like you to
- look at the year 1985. At the same time, Sir, that you are looking at the Central Bank report for that period I will ask
you to look at the National debt and debt service report
coming out of the Central Bank and I would ask you to
turn to Appendix 3.1 where you are dealing with the bond
Yen issue and I am going to produce some figures to you
today to show you that if we did not take the taxpayers
money of this country and we did not give that money to
the Japanese that today we would have over $47 million to
give to the poor people of this country and that money
could have been given to the Honourable Minister from St.
.- Andrew, the Honourable Mr. Payne. Yes we could have
given that money to him and he could have used that
money to repair all the roads in St. Lucy, whether it be
Rock Field, the ones in Crab Hill, Checker Hall, Hope
Road, Josey Hill, Alleynedale, you name it. Not only in St.
Lucy but throughout Barbados where we have a situation
where the Minister of Public Transport and Works would
like to get some money to repair the roads but he cannot
get that money and the reason why he cannot get that
money is because we have given this money to the
Japanese.

Mr. Speaker, on the 28th February, 1985 the
Government of the day borrowed five billion Yen on the - Japanese market. The conversion rate at the time, Sir, was
.01. The interest rate at the time was 7.70%. That yielded
$19 250 000 in interest. The other loan in October
yielded $18 692 000 in interest. The one in May
yielded $32 436 000, giving us a total payment of interest
- of $70 378 000, that is, if we use simple interest but it was not that easy. You had a situation, Sir, where the Yen was
increasing and on the first loan of five billion Yen, the Yen
moved in year one to .01, in year 2 to ,0126, to year 3 to
,0162, to year 5 to ,0159 and by May 1989 when the loan
was supposed to be repaid to .0140. What it means, Sir, is
that because of the increase in the Yen we were
made to pay $26 449 500 instead of $19 250 000. On that
loan we gave them $7 million alone and that had nothing
to do with the principal. Do you know what is disgraceful
about these loans, Sir?

The same time, Mr. Speaker, that they were
borrowing these loans the foreign reserves of this country
were very good and I am going to give you statistics to
prove it, Sir. In 1985, the foreign reserves at the time were
$309.7 million. But in 1981 it was $124.1 million. This
tells me that in 1981 you had a need to borrow but not in
1985, but yet still this caring Government went ahead and
borrowed that loan on the Japanese market. That statistic
does not stand alone, Sir, because I am not just talking
about the Japanese Loan. I need to relate it to what is
happening today and that is what I am intending to do now.
Today, we stand in this House of Assembly with
foreign reserves of $516.1 million and, when the first
discussion with the IADB started, we had foreign reserves
of $13.5 million. At that time there was a need to borrow.
There is no need now to borrow any money from the
IADB because if you are telling me that things were bad at
$13.5 million and now you have $516.1 million record
levels, according to the Budget Speech, can you tell me the
justifiable reason for going and borrowing money from
people and for them to tell you that you have to introduce
a VAT first? There is no need for anybody to be dictating
to this Assembly at this point in time, Sir. Nobody should
be telling us that our agricultural land should fetch the
highest value. There is no need for that. We should have a
home-grown programme where we set out the policies that
we want to follow, Sir, but no we do not have that. We
have the highest level of foreign reserves but yet still we
are allowing the IADB to dictate to us. I am saying that
something is wrong. We cannot make the same errors
twice. We made the errors in 1985 and we are about to
commit them in 1996 and, if anybody wants to question
this calculation, the first thing they will have to question is
the Economic and Financial Statistics of the Central Bank
and let me stop there, Sir.

Do you know that there was a time when you could
not pick up this document, Sir, and find the Yen
conversion in it? Do you know that? But do you know
why, Sir? The reason why, Sir, you could not find that
before, is because there are people in this country who did
not want people to understand what was going on. They
went along with this foolish myth that the Democratic
Labour Party through their policy destroyed the economy.
Yes, and they fooled a lot of people. I am saying today,
Sir, that now when you pick up this Central Bank Report
you can see the lie to that argument. All of those people
who accused the Democratic Labour Party in the early
nineties of mismanaging the economy can now see that it
was not the Democratic Labour Party that mismanaged
the economy, but it was the policies set in place that gave
all of our foreign reserves to the Japanese and that is why
we had to scramble. That is why we have so many people
at the street corners today begging and hoping that some
day they will get a job.

I am saying, Sir, that if we follow these policies as
they are dictated in this Budget the American economy will
improve because of the example used that I heard in here,
Sir, that an extra regional shirt will be cheaper. Did you
hear that, Sir? An extra regional shirt will be cheaper. In
other words, what they are saying in these proposals-is that
the American manufacturers, the English, German and
French manufacturers, will be able to send all of their
goods to Barbados and our manufacturers will give up. All
of our employees will have to go home. Is that right, Mr.
Speaker? Am I to believe that I am supposed to support
something that will send home my poor people?
There is also another argument that I would like to
challenge. There is an argument which states that food will
be cheaper. That is not true because I want you to know
that food produced within CARICOM that there are no
taxes on them. So 15 per cent on zero that you had to pay,
now you have to pay 15 per cent. So food will be up by
15 per cent straight in the beginning and when it is
compounded it will be higher than 15 per cent. I am glad
that you agree that food will be higher though. You see,
Mr. Speaker, this impression that food will be cheaper is
not true and there are people who are walking around this
country who have been giving the people the impression
that when they talk about refrigerators that people are
buying refrigerators every day. That is not a good example.
I want to hear examples of things like milk, mixed
vegetables and things like those. That is what I want to
hear about. I do not want to hear about refrigerators. I want
to hear about imported biscuits that the poor pensioners eat.
Those are the things that I want to hear about.

In the line of agriculture, Sir, we are getting the
impression that everything is well in the economy but that
is not true. How many people would know of the cotton
production? Yes, we hear about all of these successes but
we do not hear about anything that is going wrong. In
1995, Sir, we left a cotton crop which gave us 1 064 053
pounds of gin cotton, sea cotton.
Aside.
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Yes, in 1995 we would
have left the crop. Do not tell me anything about
agriculture. You cannot speak to me on agriculture. None
of you all can speak to me on agriculture. You have to
listen to me. But, Mr. Speaker, would you guess what the
crop is in 19961 I know you would tell me 900 000. That
is not true. That is the difference. It is 900 000 less. We
are now having a cotton crop of 101 000 tonnes. Gee, do
not be so grateful to them - 101 000 pounds of cotton from
a million down to 100 000. Well, if my figures a- not
right, I would like for the Honourable Minister to dispute
them and that is not all, Sir. The onion crop this year is
nothing that you can talk about, Sir. Do you know that
when we left Government we were bragging that there is
a possibility that we will have onions year round? We were
bragging about that. But now what you have is that the
amount of onions that we reaped this year, Sir, is only one
month’s supply. Can you imagine that, Sir? We as a
Government made it a policy that cotton would have been
a foreign exchange earner in this country, but now you
cannot speak of cotton as being a foreign exchange earner
anymore, Sir. You have to speak about cotton as a crop
that we never had a relationship with.

I want also to say something else. During the
Structural Adjustment Programme, a lot of people in this
country were encouraged to grow vegetables in their
backyards and on small plots. If you drive through St.
Lucy, St. Philip, St. John and so on, you will see a lot of
fields being ploughed. But you know, Sir, it is okay to
encourage people to plant their crops but at the end of the
day you must give those people hope. I ‘cannot assure my
farmers in St. Lucy that there is any hope for them now
that the change of the system where people will be able to
import vegetables as they like in this country. We as a
Government made it a policy and we put conditionalities in
place to protect our farmers and now we have a system
where we are giving away our farm markets to overseas
planters.

So tell me, Sir, if in tourism all the key jobs are
going to foreigners, if in manufacturing we are wearing
brand name gear from overseas, as said in the Budget, if in
agriculture we are depending on the outside market for our
produce, we cannot produce cotton anymore because it
seems that we knew how to produce a million pounds but
now we only know how to produce 100 000 pounds, tell
me honestly what hope can we give the young people on
the block.
That is not all, Sir. We are bragging about a sugar
crop that has increased and that is nothing to brag about.
Since 1993-94, if you look in the Development Plan put
out by the Democratic Labour Party you will see that the
figures for sugar production are nothing to brag about,
because we predicted that. The same thing with foreign
reserves. We have a sugar crop which was very good this
year, but I cannot guarantee you it will be good next year,
because we have a serious rat problem in this country
which we are not doing anything about. Once upon a time
we used to talk about town rats, but gone are the days
when you could talk about town rats, you have to talk
about Barbadian rats now, because wherever you
go you are finding rats in Barbados, and wherever you find
rats you will find garbage.

Dealing with economic matters, Sir, I want to warn
the Prime Minister, and I am very careful about this. He is
always reminding me that I was on the Board of the
Sanitation Service Authority, but I want to remind him that
when I was a member of the Board at the Sanitation - Service Authority we had plans for putting a weigh bridge
up there. I am saying he should not put one tomorrow, he
should have done that a year ago, because if he does not
put a weigh bridge at the Sanitation Service Authority he
will not have any money to give anybody in Barbados. I
am calling on the Prime Minister to do that quickly,
because I feel that as a citizen of Barbados I have a right
to make sure that whenever he has a Budget in here the
money is well spent, and whenever there is a problem I
have a right to let him know that a weigh bridge might be
the thing to solve his problem.
-
Mr. Speaker, I want to get to the transport system in
Barbados. We have three systems of transport for moving
people. The Transport Board, the minibuses and the route
taxis.
Aside,
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: I am glad you mentioned
that to me, I would like you to know that the people of
Josey Hill would like you to send another minibus up there,
because the one presently servicing up there is not enough.
Thanks for reminding me of that. I want the Minister to
know that I would like to see some buses on the roads of
St. Lucy. I will not knock you on that yet, because I am
now asking you officially on the Floor of the House, but by
this time next year if it is not done I will have to knock
you.

We also have a survey going out for the rich and - famous asking them how many tour coaches they would
like to have. I believe the economic cake of this country
must be shared fairly. I believe that if we are to give more
permits we should introduce more people into the system,
because if you give permits to more of those big people
they are going to squeeze out the small ones who have one
or two buses. Instead of giving these permits to these large
companies to kill off the small companies, you should try . to introduce some more people into the system, because if
you do not know, Sir, right now there is a serious problem
in the tourism industry in this country. Taxi drivers are
now being asked by hotels . l pay to operate from off their
premises and I am saying we cannot do this. The same taxi
drivers are important to the hotel industry, and the
Honourable Member for the City w.11 agree with me. We
cannot put ar ,I pain, whether it is “in” or “yne” on the
backs of those poor people. We must put a system where
small businessmen must be able to operate without having
to bear unnecessary costs in this country.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to see some of those jobs
that they talk about - and I am not talking about the
National Insurance jobs, I am speaking about real jobs.
Neither am I talking about moving people from off the
streets and putting them at Community College or Samuel
Jackman Prescod Polytechnic and calling them employed.
I am talking about real jobs, I want to see my people
employed. I want to see the guys off the block and the
ladies being able to fornulate plans and gain the necessary
capital to open their own businesses. This is a serious
country. If we keep forcing these guys to remain on the
block, we are going to create a situation where jealousy is
going to step in and whenever you get jealousy stepping in,
Sir, you know what will happen.

They tell me that there used to be gangs before, and
all of a sudden I do not hear anything more about gangs,
but still I am hearing you cannot even stand up at a bus
stop anymore because you are not sure who will come
along and shoot at you. I am saying to those people who
are doing those things to stop it, because it is not in the
interest of Barbados. I will not do like the others who
would give them the impression it was the right thing to
do, it is against me to say something like that.
Aside.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: No, Sir, I would never do
that. I would not walk around saying they have gangs in
Barbados. Not me! What I would say is that anytime I can
find a solution to stop those people from doing the lawless
acts they are doing, I would do anything in my power to
stop them. That is why, whether you are liming in Bush
Hall or in Military Road or Checker Hall or Pie Corner,
anywhere in St. Lucy, I feel that now the foreign reserves
are $516 million, even if we have to put in a crash
programme, the time is right. Even if we have to employ
people to tell them to go and say to the tourists ‘Welcome
to Barbados”, at least they will be doing something and
doing it in the right way. That is a service too. We must
employ people to make the tourists feel happy in Barbados
and we must employ people, even if they are tour guides,
to carry them to see the beautiful island of Barbados,
especially St. Lucy, because if you want to have tourists
coming to Barbados, all you have to do is to recommend
St. Lucy, St. Andrew and the other areas as places to
sightsee.

Mr. Speaker, we are under the belief that the tourists
come to Barbados to stay in these built-up areas. That is
not true. They want to appreciate the people, and this
fahhness about all inclusive tourism where you keep
people in a hotel and tell them not to go and mingle with
the people must stop.
Mr. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member has two
minutes to conclude.
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN. Mr. Speaker, we must
have a system where the tourists who come to Barbados
must be able to continue to go into the villages and build
that relationship, because that is the relationship that
tourism grew on in Barbados. They are accustomed going
to Cove Bay, River Bay, Stroude Bay, Archers Bay, the
Naval Base, Half Moon Fort beach and places like that,
and going to the shop and mingling with those people, so
that those people got a slice of the cake. But as the system
stands now, Sir, they get on a tour bus and all they do is
wave their hands. We do not want that, we want the
tourists to stop, have a drink with the people, ask them
how they feel and get some history about Barbados, but
with the system as it stands now they cannot know
anything about Barbados because when they pass through
Military Road there is nobody on the bus to tell them
anything about the people in Military Road. They have to
stop and ask some questions and then they can appreciate
the people of Barbados and their hospitality.
Thank you

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Mr. Speaker, I would like
to start where the Honourable Member for St. Michael
South Central has ended, referring to the statement that
gives the impression that 100% mortgages would be a bad
thing for Barbados.

Some time ago, Sir, in one of my speeches I made a
criticism of the Credit Unions of Barbados and I said their
priorities were wrong, their interest was in lending money
for cars and not for houses and businesses. So I am happy
to know that there is some support of the view that the
Credit Unions of Barbados should be prepared to lend
100% mortgages to the poor people of Barbados, and I am
going to tell you why, but I must say something else.
You just cannot have a policy where you are going to
lend them 100% mortgages, there must be certain
infrastructures put in place in the districts of Barbados. In
most districts you find land owned by the grandmother, the
father or the aunt, who are prepared to give this land to
some youngster and this youngster once the land is given
can find the capital to build a home, but in most situations
you have water md electricity, and sometimes you might
not have the road. All I am saying is, if Government sets
a policy where they are yrepared to put roads in all the
districts of Bzrbados, then there might not be the need for
all the sites and services we are talking about today. In
most of these districts once you put in the amenities, Sir,
you would see that as soon as they are put in the housing
plan for that distnct starts, because the person who is born
in that district has no need to go and buy a piece of land in
another area just because it has sites and services. What
you are actually doing is creating the same atmosphere in
the district as you are in the area with the sites and
services.

We talk a lot about how the young people are
behaving and we must ask ourselves if we are not changing
the pattern of the young people, instead of putting the
national amenities in the district we are removing those
amenities from the district and putting them elsewhere and
calling them sites and services. We are paying more
attention to the sites and services where there is not a
direct relationship with the young people than to the
districts where they were born. If we do the necessary
things we can continue to hold the family unit in the
districts. This is not a criticism of the Minister, Sir, fear
not! All I am trying to do is to help you with your job. I
am saying that once he gets the necessary finance and we
can continue to build the district relationship instead of the
sites and services relationship, that is, where you go and
find a piece of land which you call idle land, then you have
to go and build a community again. We need to get away
from that, we need to continue having the community
we always had and stop dividing and ruling, because you
will get a situation where you have a sites and services
area and then people from all about who do not have a
particular relationship with the area come and live, and
then you get attention. I am saying that in Barbados in
1996 we have to try to get away from that and if we are
going to do things like that, then we cannot come and
blame the young people, because if we are creating a
situation where there is no direct relationship and the
young people behave in a particular way, we cannot blame
the young people. You are taking the young people away
from their parents, their grandparents, their godfathers and
godmothers. What I am saying is keep them in the districts
where they can continue to have that relationship. I am not
talking about those who can afford the $100 000
mortgages. There are a lot of young people out there who
would like to have a home and because they do not have
the capital they are forced to continue living at their
parents. I am saying that if they had 100% mortgages, all
they would have to do is to find the money to build the
house and their godmother or their godfather or their father
or mother would provide them with a piece of land at the
back of their house or something like that.

Another problem, Sir, you go and you have sites and
services, and then there is something called a transfer tax,
where the poor man who is.scrambling to build a house has
to pay, but then there are people who will come and say
that they are bringing investment to the country, they have
the money but yet they do not have to pay the transfer tax.
That is something that we have to look at. We have to look
at conditions that will afford the poor people in this
country to have their own homes.
Hon. G. W. PAYNE: On a point of order, I really
don’t want to interrupt the Honourable Member, but he is
misleading the House in the sense that he does not
understand the workings of the Property Transfer Tax
system. The purchaser only pays if he is a non-national. He
doesn’t pay the Property Transfer Tax.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: I would have to go back
and check some documents to see if that is correct. As far
as I know, that is not correct. There are some kinds of
transfer taxes. I know there is something called transfer
taxes whenever there is a property transaction. If I am
wrong, I beg to be corrected there, but I am sticking to my
point.
I am saying that all the facilities available to the large
investors should be given to those poor people out there
who are trying to own their own homes instead of having
to ask Government to build units. We must get away, and
I have said it before and I will repeat it today, from this
rent mentality. We must continue to provide the
opportunity for people to own things. If we are a country
where we encourage people to own things, then you will
get a situation where people will be able to appreciate their
own country. If you give them the rent mentality, they are
not going to have the same type of respect for the property
as if it had belonged to them.
Sir, that is something that we have to strive for. When
you see your people moving towards owning their property, - then that is when the country is progressing. If you have a
situation where there is a continued demand for rental
units, something is wrong somewhere.

Mr. Speaker, we also have a situation in my
constituency and I understand earlier that the Minister
mentioned MPS not coming forward and giving areas to be
developed, but there is also an area in St. Lucy called
Mount Poyer and I would like the Minister to tell me the
position on that particular area. I have said in a debate on
rural Barbados in this Parliament, that in rural Barbados a
L road is a very important thing. One road means rural
development. You will find in any district where a road is
built, if you build a road tomorrow, I can assure you that
in 2 or 3 weeks from now you will see houses next to that
road, once it is done in a district.
I am not sure, Sir, that if you go and you have a sites
and services programme that 2 or 3 weeks after you are
going to see houses, because the persons then have to
purchase the land and then they have to turn around and
look for money to build a house, whereas if roads are put -
into the district, all they will have to do is find the money
to build their houses.

Mr. Speaker, I do not know why people believe that
when we are supporting foreign interests, everything is well
but when it comes to Barbados and you are supporting the
poor people things are wrong. It is not a crime to lend i
man $100 000 to buy a motor car to support Japan or
Germany or England, but it is a crime to give a man a
c 100% mortgage to build a house for himself and develop
family life. We must ask ourselves what example we are
setting for the young people when a young man can pick
up a paper and read an article that gives the impression that
it is better to have a car than to have a house. We must ask
ourselves what type of educational system we have in
Barbados.

I am saying that the slant is such that you get the
impression in Barbados that anything that is foreign is good
and anything that is local is bad. We must move away from
that, Sir. When we see situations like these we must be
prepared to come and talk about these situations. If we do
not represent the interest of those small people out there,
who are going to represent them? I will give you a good
example, Sir. We are in the crop season. You know,
sometimes you can say things are well, but you have to be
very careful. When I think about the machine, I
automatically think about the rich man. When I think about
the cane cutter I think about the poor man.
We have a good sugar crop, and I want to ask the
MPS on the Other Side what effect that sugar crop is
having out there for the poor man. We had a discussion in - this Assembly about cane fires and I said certain things that
time, but I am saying that it doesn’t make sense having a
good sugar crop when the poor people in this country are
not feeling the true effect of that sugar crop. We have that
situation today and there are a lot of people who would tell
you that they cannot feel the good sugar crop.

A couple years ago you used to have a situation that
dunng the sugar crop when you go through your
constituency you used to see cane cutters building on,
adding to their houses or building new houses but we do
,- not have that situation this year. So we must ask ourselves
where the revenue is going and if the poor people will have
the same connection to the sugar industry that they had
years ago.

“TRANSPORTATION AND WASTE TRANSFER

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Mr. Speaker, I rise to
speak on this Bill, Sir. This Bill has some serious
implications for the poor people of this country, especially
those who live in rural Barbados. I have been looking at
the Schedule and my observation that the $150.00 for a
motor car would not affect the rich people in this country
because they were aware that this Bill was coming and that
is why you will see on the roads today so many Mercedes
etc. Sir, I have checked and from a good authority the
evidence is that the minimum life of a Mercedes is 15
years so it tells me that if you have a new Mercedes
today that the impact on the rich with this tax would
not affect them at all but it is the poor man who buys
the Lada who might have to buy 5 or 6 Ladas
within a 15-year period that would have to find himself
forking out this levy.

Sir, the same poor man would have to buy tyres. It is
true that the rich might have to buy them but if the rich
have to buy tyres they can afford to buy tyres because the
$50.00 tax means nothing to the rich but it means a lot to
the poor people in this country.
Refrigerators, Sir. Poor people cannot go and buy an
expensive refrigerator that would last them 12 years. In that
- 12-year period sometimes you find that they have to buy 5
refrigerators so I am saying that this is another imposition
that is going to impact heavily on poor people so when you
total these charges you will see that they will come to
$267.00 and you could be sure that the poor people in this
country would have to bear the total effect of these
charges.
Aside.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: If you have a problem
with brand name sneakers, I have no problem with you
taxing brand name sneakers because nobody has to wear
brand name sneakers but people have to buy refrigerators.
If you have a problem with brand name sneakers tax them
one thousand percent. It means nothing to me because I
could easily tell my people in St. Lucy, the poor people,
that they need not wear brand name sneakers but how can
I tell my people that they should not sleep on a mattress.
Is that what you are telling me? Is that what the
Honourable Member for St. James South is saying to me?
Are you trying to tell me that my poor people in St. - Lucy should not be sleeping on mattresses and they
should not have television sets? You cannot be
serious about this. I agree with you, if you want to tax
brand name sneakers I would tell you to tax them by
one thousand percent.

When you want to deal with me, be careful. Mr.
Speaker, Sir, I am also womed and I somehow believe that
the Honourable Member for St. Michael South Central had
a peep at my notes. I honestly believe that because, Sir, I
sat here and when this levy was being talked about I asked
myself: How is it that a couple of days we were told that
we will soon be getting a VAT? Listen to this carefully and
the VAT is supposed to get rid of a lot of nuisance taxes
and yet still we are introducing another one today, Sir. This
is a serious thing. I am not blaming anybody. I am not
trying to pull down anybody. But I am saying that, if we
are correcting the system, correct it one time. If it means
that VAT is going to deal with everything, leave it until
VAT and I am told that VAT will soon be introduced. So
if you are going to introduce VAT shortly, there is no need
to bring this Environmental Levy and I am serious about
this.

Mr. Speaker, I am on record in the Minutes at the
Sanitation Service Authority since 1986 of calling for an
incinerator for this country and every time I talk about an
incinerator for this country people tell me that it will cost
too much money. But do you realize something, Mr.
Speaker? An incinerator will mean something to the people
on Military Road, Pie Corner and Josey Hill. But do you
know something? We can find millions of dollars to spend
on sewerage plants. Do you know why, Sir? It has nothing
to do with the people in Military Road or in Pie Corner or
in Josey Hill.
Aside.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: No, you would say that.
But I will teach you something. You need a lot of teaching
and, when I am speaking, you should not get involved.
Remember the last time you had anything to say to me was
at Arch Hall and I had the Honourable Member for St.
Thomas to pay me witness to this and we are still waiting
on your promise.
Hon. D. A. C. SIMMONS: On a point of order, Sir.
That is very correct, Sir. The last time the 3 of us met, Sir,
was in the church hall at Arch Hall and the people of Arch
Hall nearly murdered languidly. They abused him and ran
him out of the place, Sir, but he has a lot of courage. He
stood up there and took all of the insults and abuse that
night. He is a very courageous man, Sir.
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: That is true and my good
friend, the magistrate, was there too. But, Mr. Speaker, do
you know what happened, Sir? You know that I can go to
Arch Hall today and walk all through Arch Hall. But there
are some people in here that cannot go because June has
passed and another June is about to pass. So I do not worry
about that, Sir.

I understand that they want trees imported now to
plant all across Barbados. Do you know why? We have a
serious garbage problem, Sir, and not only do we have a
serious garbage problem, but we have a serious rat
problem. I am saying that if this Levy has to be introduced
that the BAS should be the first people to get their
$100 000 out of this Levy. Do you know why, Sir? We
need to eradicate the rats from Barbados and wherever you
can see rats you can see garbage. This is foolishness, Sir,
that money was spent at the Sanitation Service Authority -
I was there, Sir.
Aside.
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: No, I was there. I am
going to deal with that. That is why I am always calling in
this House of Assembly for the accrual system of
accounting. If we had the accrual system of accounting, the
nonsense that I am hearing about money was not spent
at the Sanitation Service Authority, nobody would be able
to get up and say that. But do you know why, Sir?
Sometimes people speak and they forget what they say.
They brag about the amount of money that they had to pay
on our behalf not realizing that if you had to look at the
total amount of money incurred under the Democratic
Labour Party in trying to service Mangrove and compare
it with the amount of money incurred by the Barbados
Labour Party, that light will be shown. And that is, Sir,
more money was incurred with the Democratic Labour
Party than under the Barbados Labour Party and that they
found bills is no lie. They found bills owed to people
because a lot of money was spent on Mangrove and the
Sanitation Service Authority and it must be said in
here that if certain people at the Sanitation Service
Authority would stop fighting among themselves and
manage up there probably we would have not had that
problem. There are a lot of people in here who know that
as a fact. There are a lot of people who are trying to
achieve positions even though there are people in positions
up there already and there is no management structure
at the Sanitation Service Authority not even today.
People believe that because you put people in a position
in a management structure…
Aside.
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: The records at the
Sanitation Service Authority will show that I have been
fighting for 8 years …
Aside.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Unsuccessfully - yes,
because I have no problem with that. People do not
understand that there is a particular structure of boards
and some day I will get a chance to change that. There
is a serious need to overhaul certain boards in this
country. There is too much power in the hands of
certain people and I am not denying that. This foolishness
about saying oh, you are a board member and they know
full well being a board member does not always mean
that you can do a lot of things. So this nonsense must be
stopped, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I want to know and it is a serious
question if when the VAT is introduced is this one of the
indirect taxes that will be removed? I want to know
because if that is so there is a possibility that I might
support this Bill. But if you tell me that it is going to
continue with the VAT, I cannot support it, Sir, because
then you will have a situation in this country where you
would have two taxes going the same time when in truth
and in fact you are fighting to have a one-tax system and
that is indirect taxes that I am speaking about, Sir.
Every Member over there would agree that once we
had a problem in this country where people were tipping
all over Barbados. They were tipping in Jack In The Box
Gully, Stoney Gully and any gully and I remember there
was a massive programme to clean up. That is why I like
the Honourable Member for St. Thomas. I like his honesty.
He is telling me that they are still doing it and that is why
I know that this Bill will encourage them not only to still
do it but do it more so than ever. If you are prepared to a
introduce a Bill, Sir, that is going to encourage people to
do things like that, that is up to you. But my suggestion is
that, if you need this revenue and you are soon going to
introduce the VAT, all you have to do is to look at a way
where you can add on a cost to this. Because what you are
doing is sending this right on the backs of the poor people
of this country who are fighting to be employed.

Mr. Speaker, this is a serious thing and sometimes we
seem not to be listening to those people out there. The
people out there are suffering and they are crying and the
more they are suffering and crying, I am getting the
impression that more pressure is being piled on. I have to
live in this country, Sir, and I am saying that we have to be
very careful how we are treating those poor people out
there. Because it is just like telling me, Sir, that we in here
are saying that a mattress is a luxury.
Aside.

Mr. SPEAKER: No Honourable Members said that.
You would not want such a comment to be attributed to…
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: No, I nevet said that. I
never said that any Honourable Member said that. I would
never do a thing like that, Sir. But I am saying to charge
a poor man, Sir, $10.00 for a mattress, he cannot afford to
pay that cost and the thing about it, Sir, especially in this
time when that poor person out there is fighting hard to r.
work to make sure that they can pass on a piece of change
to the boys around the block, to make sure that they do not
do wrong things, Sir. I know that we would not like this
Honourable House to put anymore pressure on the shoulder
of the Honourable Member for St. Thomas because his
hands are full and everybody knows that I am borrowing
a loan too. Yes, the Honourable Member for St. Thomas is
a good man. We cannot afford to put pressure on his
shoulder. We cannot enforce anything that is going to cause
young men to be on the streets doing the wrong things, we
must build a good society and we must make sure that any
impositions will unite a family and not divide a family.
This $10 for the mattress is the same $10 that the mum or
dad might have to give the child on the block who cannot
find a job.

This is a serious imposition and I will ask the
Honourable Member for Christ Church South to join with
me in asking the Government to rethink this and also to
ask the Government to consider whether this is an
additional tax to the VAT or if this will be part of the
VAT, because if it is not we are going to have some
serious problems.
Some people believe that just because they live places
where garbage is collected daily there is not a garbage
problem, but you would know, Sir, because your
constituents in Military Road are always complaining to
you that they would like their garbage collected.
Mr. SPEAKER: I would like to inform the
Honourable Member that the dump in Military Road and
Pasture Road is no longer a dump. I personally filled it in.
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Oh, you personally filled
it in?
Mr. SPEAKER: It is no longer a dump, it is a playing
field now.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: The Honourable Member
for St. James South should really congratulate you, Sir,
because you are doing a very good job, one that the
Sanitation Service Authority cannot do. You should be
congratulated, and I want to personally congratulate you for
doing a good job. I wish I could say that for a lot more
that have the power to do things.
Mr. Speaker, there is also a charge at the Port. This
charge is going to start at one thing and by the time the
charges are added on it is going to end up somewhere else.
You know, Sir, that these charges are not going to be kept
by the people who have purchased the goods with the c.i.f.
charges, they are going to land right on the backs of the
poor people in this country, the consumers. As I said
before, the people who have money would not worry,
because they would look at $267 and say it is no money,
but $267 sometimes is a week’s pay, for some it could be
two and for others it could be three. When we look at
something, and some people would want to tell you that
$267 is not a lot of money, I am telling you $267 is a lot
of money for poor people and it is in demand.
The Honourable Member for St. George South would
tell you that there are some youngsters who would wait on
you to get a piece of change, and we have to make sure we
do not create situations where people are forced to wait on
us to get a piece of change. We have to make sure that we
get away from these regressive tax systems and move
towards the progressive tax systems. I am saying this
environmental levy is a regressive tax system right here in
operation, because it is not the freighter who is going to
pay this tax, it is the poor man who has a tree to be
removed that is going to feel the full impact of this tax.
This tipping levy will be passed on to the consumer.
Talking about that, I would like to see M W doing
some work like that for the poor people in this country,
especially the pensioners. I honestly believe that when the
pensioners have trees in their backyards, there should be
some department at M W they can call and get someone
to come and remove those trees. I am finding too many
cases where old people, who have worked long - and this
is not a criticism of my friend, the Minister, but I am
telling him that he has to set up a department in his
Ministry to look after these old people if he wants me to
believe that he is caring, and I believe he will set up one,
because I do not believe that old people should be made to
call around to find out how you get a tree removed or
trimmed or anything like that, and then to hear that they
have to pay a tipping fee along with the freight fee. They
would have contributed already, and we have to stop asking
our people to contribute when they are young and also
when they are old.

It is not only the trees, when I get to the National
Assistance Board I will deal with that too, but we are not
now dealing with the National Assistance Board, we are
dealing with the old people and I am not going to tell you
all of their problems today, I will get an opportunity to talk
about the others.
There are two groups we have to look after, the
young ones and the old ones, and we a: having a serious
problem today where we are not looking after those two
groups. The old ones have to fork out of their pension for
tipping fees and the young ones are deprived of money
they can use as capital to generate more revenue to open
their own business by having their parents taking that same
money and paying tipping fees and levies. If we are serious
about small businesses, we have to be serious about finding
a way where we are going to give additional revenue to
people to open small businesses and not take that revenue
away from those people.
I expect the Minister, when she gets up, to agree with
some of the things I have said and not three months from
now, because the garbage problem in this country belongs
to all of us. The same way the sewage problem can be
dealt with, the garbage problem should be dealt with. As
you know, Sir, and I will continue to make this point,
whenever it has anything to do with poor people we have
a problem in this country and garbage not only affects the
rich, it affects the poor, and that is why we cannot get an
incinerator in this country. If it was something that was
only affecting the rich in this county, I can assure you a
lot of pressure would have been placed on MPS. The same
way certain MPS living along the west coast, the south
coast and the City were under pressure for a sewerage
plant, we would have had a lot of pressure if they had a lot
of rich people living in rural Barbados, and in St. Andrew,
and I know the people of St. Andrew would like to have an
incinerator.

The people of St. Lucy would like to have one too,
because we feel that this is the only sensible way to tackle
the garbage problem in this country. It is a waste of time
when every minute you have problems, where somebody is
saying they don’t want this and they don’t want that. You
have a solution and do not deal with it.
I am saying, Sir, that we know the solution, why can’t
we deal with it? Are we going to wait on the IADB, the
World Bank or the IMF to tell us that we need an
incinerator? These are ideas that are being placed here on
record by our own people with our own thinking and I find
on too many occasions we have a situation in this country
where we had good ideas and the only time we could
implement these ideas are when we are told to do them by
some institution overseas.
I would say and I would not deal with the particular
point now but in the Budget, there is enough evidence that
whenever we have accepted the evidence and the
information and the dictates from people overseas on our
economy instead of having good foreign reserves they slide
down and the 1985 situation should have taught us a
lesson. It seems to me that don’t care what happens to us
we are not learning. I am sorry abut that, Sir. We brag
about our educational system and we are committing the
same errors over and over. We have good foreign reserves
and yet still we allow people to tell us we need this and
that. Mr. Speaker, when we have money we need not
borrow. This is a serious thing. There is always a catch
clause in these things. As in 1985 people want to saddle us
with their problems and they pass it on us and they
help other countries and as I said I will deal with it in
the Budget.

That is why I am saying that we as a country must
take a decision. If we feel that incinerators are the right
thing, we should put incinerators in place. Nobody should
tell us that because their country do not have incinerators
and they have landfills, that we in Barbados should not
have incinerators, that they have to put incinerators in their
country then for us to come and say we will follow pattern.
We must start leading by example and we have the
capacity to lead by example. We are having this situation
every time, countries telling us we cannot do this and we
cannot that and whenever you check it is because they do
not have it in place and they believe that we should not get
it because they don’t have it.
We have it in education where there are some
countries whose vision, and this is just an example going
back to the incinerator point, because they don’t have free
secondary education that it should not be here in Barbados.
Some countries now feel that incinerators is a new fashion
thing, the latest technology, blah, blah, blah. We kowtow a
to them and agree that we should not get incinerators in
Barbados. Do you know what you are actually doing?
When you deprive the people of having incinerators you
are creating problems. The same way you have a problem
in St. Thomas you will have that same problem in St.
Lucy, in St. Peter, in St. Andrew, in Christ Church, St.
Philip, St. George, wherever you go.
I am saying that if you have a problem and you know
the solution you should go straight ahead and make sure
you solve the problem.

Mr. SPEAKER: The Honourable Member has 2
minutes to conclude.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: … Because what you are
doing is making the citizens of this country very unhappy
and we cannot be talking about economic growth at the
same time when you are making the citizens of the country
unhappy. We are not in a crisis situation anymore. If we
were in a crisis situation where sometimes in a crisig
people understand the pressure. Everything is well, so why
are you putting so much pressure on the citizens of this
country? I am saying that you should rethink what you said
about incinerators and we must go full speed ahead and try
and get an incinerator. If that is what is going to make the
people of Barbados happy, we must please them because in
the long run when it is done everybody will acknowledge
that we should have done it 26 years ago.
Sir, a good example of that is that the sugar industry
wanted restructuring years ago and nobody did anything F
about it and now it has been done everybody is saying that
it should have been done since 1967 when Mr. Barrow
talked in the “Cane Blade Speech”. Thank you very much,

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN. I enter this debate at this
time because I think it is very important that the case be
put on behalf of some people who have contributed to the
National Insurance Scheme and sometimes find themselves
not being able to benefit from this scheme. We have had
situations where people have contributed for years to the
National Insurance Scheme and sometimes because they
have had a break in their employment at a particular time
find themselves unemployed and because they do not have
benefits in a particular period they can claim but cannot
receive a benefit.

You can have a situation where someone has worked
for 35 years and let’s say for a 3-month period they have
not contributed and because they have not contributed for
that 3-month period the National Insurance Scheme says
they are not entitled to benefits. I honestly believe that that
is not fair because anybody who has contributed to a
scheme for 35 years or so should be entitled and no
particular period should be regarded as a special period but
the total contributions paid by that particular employee
should be taken into account.

Mr. Speaker, we also have a situation where we have
13 500 self-employed people and out of that 13 500 selfemployed
people only 1 906 are contributing. We must ask
ourselves how we are contributing to this fact. I am saying
that when you look at the amount of money paid for a noncontributory
pension and you look at the minimal amount
paid to the contributory pensioners then you must ask
yourselves if the gap between the two is not such that it
encourages people not to pay to the National Insurance
Scheme.

We have a situation, Sir, where somebody might be
getting $126 every two weeks for not paying contributions
and somebody might be paying $134 for paying
contributions. Is there incentive then for that person who is
receiving $126 to pay contributions just to get an
additional $8? I am not saying it is ight but I must ask if
we are not contributing to a system where we are
encouraging people not to contribute.
We also find ourselves in another situation where
sometimes there are employers who will be happy to pay
the money that is deducted on a weekly basis when they
have the money and this is something I think the National
Insurance Board must look at, allowing some small
businessmen to pay in those deductions on a weekly basis
instead of having to wait six weeks after to pay the money
that is deducted because if you can pay $10 it does not
mean that you might be able to pay $40. I am saying if it
is $10 per week every time you get the $10 you pay $10.

I cannot see why an employer should be penalised
because the National Insurance Scheme does not put a
system in place where that employer is allowed to pass on
the money as it is deducted. What the Scheme is doing is
encouraging the employer probably to have money to pay
his light bill.
Aside,

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Yes. What you are doing
is building up a reserve probably to pay a bill which is
more important. I am not saying that employers should do
that but we must be realistic about these things. Here it is
on a weekly basis, a man deducts $10. He cannot pay that
$10 to the National Insurance Scheme. Why? He has
deducted $10 from his employees so he should be able to
pay over the $10 to the National Insurance Scheme. But
what the National Insurance Scheme is saying to that man
is “No. Keep it. You have to deduct 3 or 4 more weeks”.
Then you have $50. You have a light bill which is
presented to you of $50. You have a choice and you have
to ask yourself whether to pay the light bill because you
only have $50 or to pay the National Insurance contribution
because the National Insurance Department has asked you
to hold the $50 to pay the light bill. You pay the light bill
because you cannot operate without the light.
There is a myth in this country that sometimes
because people do not pay National Insurance that they are
dishonest. I would say those people who have the money
to pay and do not pay it, they are dishonest. But I know
many small businessmen, and those are the people I have
always elected to speak on their behalf, and I will continue
to speak on their behalf, sometimes find it difficult even to
get $5 000 in overdraft from a bank to set up their own
business to help employ people.

Mr. Speaker, we cannot only blame the National
Insurance Department for this. Employees and businesses
must see that it is also their role to make sure that the
company or business isloperating at such a rate that it can
generate enough money to be there to help pay their
National Insurance. Sometimes all the blame is shifted to
the employer and the impression is given to employees that
they can do anything they like. The employer must pay.
This is wrong. In a business the employee is just as
important as the employer. The employee provides the
labour and the employer improvises the capital and the two
must go hand in hand. If the labour is not performing then ,,
the capital cannot perform.

I am saying to this House, Sir, that we must be very
careful sometimes how we give the impression out there
that employers are criminals because there are some
employees who sometimes believe that employers have the
money and they are doing all sorts of other things with the
money and they are depriving them of having a benefit that
they are entitled to. At the same time those employees
might not be performing the way they should have been
performing but they do not see that as a crime. I am saying
that employers have a right to try to generate enough
revenue to pay the Director of the National Insurance his
fair due and the employees have a right to make sure that
the businesses are run successfully to make sure that those
contributions and the cash is there to make sure that the
Director of National Insurance gets his cheque.
Mr. Speaker, I also feel that employees sometimes
must realize that cash flow is important. You might have
a situation where a business is owed so much money and
there is a new phenomenon in Barbados where people
sometimes pay you and when you believe you have a
payment in truth and in fact you do not have a payment.

You find yourselves with so many bounced cheques that
when it is time to pay the National Insurance you do not
have what you thought was money but you are just holding
pieces of paper that are no help. You cannot turn around
then and write a cheque to the National Insurance
Department based on the pieces of paper you have. When
you write a cheque you must have the necessary cash to
make sure that that cheque that is written to the National
Insurance Department w backed up by the necessary cash
in the bank.

There is a group of people, Sir, who we encourage to
leave this country. We encourage them to go to England.
We encourage them to go to America and we encourage
them to go to Canada. These people worked in Barbados
before they left this country. They went overseas. They
sent back their money. Their money was invested in this
country and now they have returned to this country where
they have worked hard in and on behalf of, they are finding
it very difficult to get a pension from this country.
I am saying, Sir, even if you offer them only $20 you
must acknowledge that those people would have made
a contribution to the country and we must acknowledge that
they would have helped develop this country or not you are
going to find a situation where you encourage people to
bring cars, or whatever you want to name it, but they are
not going to come back to this country because they are
going to feel that when they come back to this country they
are not going to gain anything from the country that they
would have sent all their money to help develop. What you - would get instead of those people sending their money to
Barbados, it will remain in England, Canada or America
and we do not want that. We want to encourage those
people to come back to this country, bring back their
pensions and bank accounts to help boost the reserves in
this country. So if we are going to attract these people we
must give them something. We must tell them even if it is
$20 that we are prepared to give them something when
they come back to this country.

Dealing with the reserves, Sir, I am not happy that the
National Insurance Department, and say that the relevant
Minister may have to take the blame for it, but I am not
– happy that we have invested those reserves. I am not happy
that to have $532 million today you are going to tell me
that 13 years from now we are going to find ourselves in
trouble when you have a scenario that in 1995 you are $5
million short and you have investment of over $500 million
and you are going to tell me 13 years from now we are
going to be in trouble?

I am saying that if it means setting up a separate
- depamnent in the National Insurance to look after planning
and investing these reserves, we are going to have to do
that. It is going to be an initial cost but in the long run we
need to invest this money in such a way that we will not
be asking the taxpayers of this country to fork out more
money in terms of a higher percentage.
I want to deal with another point, Sir. At present the
small man in this country pays, and listen to this one very
- carefully, Sir. The small man in this country, in rural
Barbados and in the other sections of Barbados they pay on
100% of their salary and I am not saying they pay 100%
on their salary in national insurance. What I am saying is
that they pay on 100% of their salary and there are people
in this country who only pay sometimes on 50% of their
salary.

I want to know what is wrong in increasing the limit
-. from $3 100. What is so special about $3 100? Why can’t
we be paying on $6 W? Why can’t we say you pay on
everything you work for the same way that the small man
in this country is asked to pay on everything he works for?
I do not know, Sir, if there is some special reason that is
missing me. I would really like to know.
We also have another situation, Sir, and I was very
grateful to the Honourable Member for St. Thomas for
bringing it up. There are people in this country who would
have taken work contracts with a built in pension. They
would have started with one particular employer. For some
reason that employer is not able to continue his business,
but yet there are some people who feel that they are better
able to manage that person’s money than the person and
some of the employees do not even have a house to live in
but yet they have a large sum of money set aside for some
special group of people to invest. Can you tell me, Sir, in
1995 where a man cannot provide a job for himself, he
cannot provide a home for himself, but he can have money
and sometimes he cannot even feed himself but yet he has
a large sum of money sitting somewhere else for a special
group in Barbados to dictate and they would tell you that
they can better manage your money than you.

In other words, we say in Barbados, while the grass
is green the donkey is dying. I am saying, Sir, that it
cannot be right. No particular group of people can feel that
they have a special interest to look after anybody’s money
and they can invest any money better than anybody else. I
am saying that the same way the investment was used to
build houses elsewhere it is time that it happens in
Barbados with the private sector pension fund. I am not
arguing right now for the Government pension fund. When
they put their investment portfolio in place, then two years
from now I will come and put a case for the Government
pension fund because I also believe, Mr. Speaker, that I
cannot see how a man has money set aside and he cannot
use it as collateral. What foolishness is that, Sir? You
know, Sir, that you have something and you cannot use it
as collateral because a too-few group in Barbados decides
that they are so powerful they are going to dictate the pace
to the small man in this country.

Mr. Speaker, if that is right I do not want to know
what is wrong. We must also thank the Prime Minister in
his introductory statement for admitting that some 29 years
ago some group of people got together to form the National
Insurance Scheme and we must at this time congratulate
the Democratic Labour Party for on the 5th June 1967
having the foresight to start this scheme. We must also
congratulate the Government for acknowledging that the
Scheme is a good scheme so nobody would say that I am
partisan about that, Sir.

The Honourable Member for St. Joseph is saying that
the history is wrong and I am saying if the history is wrong
it is not my error it would have to be the error of the
Honourable Member for St. Peter, because I have noted
this here and the record of the House will show that that is
what was said in this House earlier on. So, Sir, I am
calling on all the self-employed people in this country to
acknowledge that there is a future ahead and that if they
do not pay to the National Insurance Scheme that they will
not only affect themselves but they will affect their
children, their grandchildren and their great grandchildren.
Thank you very much, Sir.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Mr. Speaker, I rise to
spedk on this Resolution and I would like to say that when
one looks at the inflation between the years 1991 and 1996,
one will realize that these pensioners in truth and
in fact, Sir, really are due to over 14 per cent increase. It
is not politics, Sir. The problem is that these pensioners do
not have an opportunity now to come and compete with the
younger civil servants for a job on the market and we have
to find a way of compensating those pensioners for the
amount that they would have given up since 1991 up to
1996.
In light of increases that are happening daily, Sir, we
really should look at this increase and the 2.5 per cent in
my opinion, Sir, is low. I agree with the Prime Minister
that we have to find another way of compensating these
workers. But, Sir, it is not all just to say that we have to
find another way because while these pensioners are
waiting for us to find another way a lot of them are
suffering. Some of them have situations where sometimes
a mahogany tree might fall on their houses and it might be
a year, it might be 2 years and they are still waiting on the
National Assistance Board to fix that roof. I am saying, Sir,
that if you take the increase that they are getting and ask
them to repair the roof, the amount of money that they are
receiving as an increase cannot repair the roof. So if you
are going to ask the pensioners to accept a 2.5 per cent
increase, what I am saying is that the Government agencies
will have to do more than what they are accustomed doing
so that the demand on these pensioners would not be so
great. All I am asking, Sir, is that if you are going to say
that they are going to get 2.5 per cent that the Government
agencies should do their job, Sir, and help these poor
pensioners.

 HEAD 36 - MINISTRY OF HEALTH - $2 080 467

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Mr. Chairman, I am very
grateful to be able to speak on this Head. Some time last
year, as a new MP to this Assembly, one got the
impression that supplementaries were something you would
not expect to see in this Assembly again. The impression
was given, Sir, that supplementaries were wrong, they were
wicked and it showed that the Minister of Finance at that
time was not capable of accounting figures.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Okay, Sir, I withdraw the
remarks, but I would say that the impression I got is that
there was something wrong in comlng to this Assembly for
supplementaries. I also got the impression that last year
would have been the last time we would have been seeing
supplementaries like these. One would recall the -
supplementary on the University of the West Indies, and
the impression that was given at that time was that you
could not wait until the last moment to bring a
supplementary to this House and that there was something
wrong on that.

Mr. Chairman, I am extremely grateful to the
Honourable Member for Christ Church South for repeating
something in this Assembly that I have repeated three L
times, and I am about to repeat it for the fourth time. If we
had adopted the accrual system of accounting, we would
not be in this predicament today, because we would
account for all the expenses of Government and we would
not have to come back here every year asking this House
to account for supplementaries. All I am saying is that at
the beginning of the year all the finance officers would
account for the total expenditure and at the end of March
people will not hide expenditure in their desks to present at
the beginning of the following year, At the end of March -
the outstanding bills would be accounted for and then the
public of Barbados would know the true deficit, but what
we are getting now is a situation where we in Barbados do
not know the true deficit of this country. We do not know
the amount of money we owe, and I am calling for a stop
to this system. It is time that when we pick up documents
in this Assembly we know that the deficit is 1% and not
3%, because somebody is hiding 2% of the deficit. I am
saying that the system must be changed. You should not
have a Ministry where when you feel that all your bills
have been paid the civil servants tell you that you have
bills going forward. This must stop, Sir, the time is right
and I am calling on the Barbados Labour Party to stop it .
They have said in their Manifesto that they will cany out
changes like this and I am calling on them to make these
necessary changes.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Dear Grand-daughter,

Love,  Grandma

KARAOKE AND LIME EVERY FRIDAY NIGHT AT MOON TOWN, ST. LUCY, BARBADOS. EXPERIENCE THE FUN IN A COZY ATMOSPHERE IN THE NORTH OF THE ISLAND.  A PLACE WHERE DREAMS COME THROUGH. SAVOUR MOON TOWN’S RUM PUNCH, LOCAL SEA CAT, BBQ PIG TAILS, FRIED SNAPPER, CONCH AND MORE.