Moontown

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Mr. Chairman, earlier this
year I complained about the amount of time that we spend
in this Parliament looking after the interests of certain
people in this country. I cannot seriously continue every
Tuesday or Friday to come to this Assembly and the debate
is channelled in one particular direction. .. I cannot honestly
believe that as an Assembly that we come here every
Tuesday and today we are now discussing a Bill that
relates to the Securities Exchange of Barbados and we are - not discussing changing the Companies Act of Barbados.
I cannot seriously take part in this debate for the
simple reason that any Act that tells me…

Rt. Hon. 0. S. ARTHUR: Mr. Chairman, Sir, on a
point of order. The Member is misleading the House. We
are not discussing a Bill. We are discussing a money
Resolution and if the Member is confusing a money
Resolution with an Act to amend the Companies Act, I can
understand the source of his confusion and will urge him
to follow his own advice and don’t participate in the debate.
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Thank you very much, Sir,
for your intervention, but you know that you cannot change
my thoughts and I will continue on the road I am going. I
am saying Mr. Chairman, that anytime that you are asking
poor people in this country and the small man to invest in
large businesses when there is a section in the Companies
Act that states that nobody can tell directors when to pay
a dividend that we are wasting people’s time in this
Parliament.

We need to change the Companies Act to make sure
that whenever a company makes money … It is
discretionary and it should be changed, because if we are
asking small people to invest money in companies that are
making money and directors can then come and say …
Hon. D. A. C. SIMMONS: On a point of order, Mr.
Chairman. The Honourable Member has not pointed out the
particular section of the Companies Act but if it is in the
Companies Act it is a reflection of the old common law
principle. The payment of dividends is a discretion vested
in the directors, dependent upon whether a company has
made profit because you cannot pay a dividend from
capital. He should know that.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: I would like to find out
what is the point of order that the Honourable Member got
up on.
Aside.
Mr. D, St. E. KELLMAN: Mr. Chairman, he got up
to say exactly what I am saying that the payment of a
dividend is drscretionary, that o ~ l yth e directors can…
Aside.
Mr. D. St. E. KILLMAN: Mr. Chairman, he can say
what he likes, but I am saying to you that if tomorrow a
company makes $2 million and the directors decide they
are not going to pay dividends the shareholders cannot do
anything about it, especially with the structure of the
companies in Barbados. So do not come with this and tell
me, and uy to fool people that they must pay dividends.

I am telling you that if you look at the structure of
companies in Barbados, most of them come to Barbados
for money when they need cash. That is a fact. Let me tell
you something, try issuing shares in successful companies
and see who get them. Whenever poor people try to get
some, they say that to encourage poor people to get shares
in this company, you are only creating work and they go
for the large block.

I am saying, Sir, that if we are going to be serious
about the Securities Exchange of this country, that we
must be prepared as a government to change the
Companies Act. Everybody would tell me that this is a
standard thing throughout the world, but Barbados can
be a first. I know that the Honourable Member for Christ
Church South would agree with that.
It is time that we set examples for other people to
follow. It is unfair to ask people to invest in companies
when they have no say in whether they are going to get a
dividend.

Let me give you an example of what I am talking
about, Sir. A small man, as I normally refer to them, Sir,
he has $10 000, he hears about a company that is issuing
shares, a successful company, he is accustomed having that
$5 000 in the bank and every year at 10% he probably
would get $500. He takes up that money, he buys shares
into a company in Barbados. Directors, the following year,
decide that ‘they want to expand the company and the
money they have, they want for the expansion of the
company and they are not paying a dividend.

What happens to that poor man? What is he supposed
to live on? What is that poor man supposed to live on?
That is exactly what I am talking about. Some people
before they listen, they jump up and put their foot.right in
their mouths.
I am saying, Mr. Chairman, that the Companies Act
of Barbados needs to be changed, so that the discretionary
measures of directors,should be taken out. It is wrong
because what can also happen, Sir, we could encourage
poor people to get involved in things that they do not know
about.

There could be directors, Sir, who, when they realise
that they need capital, they come to the market, they issue
the shares and when things have changed in the company
they use that policy to frustrate small business people, and
small people in this country to encourage them to sell back
their shares to the same directors.
I am saying that the policy and the Companies Act as
it stands, is not in the interest of small people and it needs
to be changed.

So if we as a Parliament are going to take up a $100
million to put in the Securities Exchange to enhance the
profits of other people, we must ask ourselves if we san
live with that. I am saying, Sir, that you cannot live sith
it, and I cannot live with it either. The interest of the small
man must be represented.

This is only one piece that we will be discussing
today, but you will have plenty more going in one
direction. It is time for this to change. If we are going to
consider ourselves as serious politicians, and I do not care
how .much sports models people talk about, this is
something serious to discuss. We expect serious discussion
on this. We do not expect people to come in here and take
up taxpayers money and give it away like that. When
certain things are questioned, they talk about sports model.
This is a serious problem. When serious issues are
being discussed, people must be prepared to listen.
Thank you very much, Sir.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Mr. Deputy Speaker, when
one listened to the Honourable Member for St. Thomas one
got the impression that prior to 1994 we had a serious
crime problem in Barbados and that the numbers have now
decreased. I have the statistics, Sir, and these statistics …
Aside.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: … for the inmates, the
number of people in prison.
Aside.
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: You gave the statistics and
the impression when you were giving the statistics was that
under the DLP the prison population increased, but under
the Barbados Labour Party it decreased.
Mr. Deputy Speaker, I wish to repeat the figures. The
Honourable Member for St. Thomas said that in 1987 there
were 385 and that by 1994 they increased to 716. If one
were to take those figures and take the 385 from the 716,
one would get a figure of 331 more inmates. If one were
to divide that figure by 7, one would get 47 per year. That
is why the Honourable Member attacked me the way he
did, because he knew that once I got figures in my hand I
would have been able to prove him wrong. By 1996 the
figure increased to 81 1 from 716 in 1994, giving a total of
95 in two years. As you are aware, Sir, we have not
completed two years as yet, but we had an increase. When
‘one divides 95 by 2 one gets 47.5, Mr. Deputy Speaker. So
why are we patting ourselves on our shoulders giving the
impression that something is wrong with the jawbone of
the MP for St. Lucy? Leave me alone.

Mr. Deputy Speaker, let us get to thc meat of the
debate. I am a bit worried. I have no problem with people
searching students. I have a son and I feel the teacher has
a right to search my child’s bag, but I have a problem that
if you search my son’s bag automatically you assume that
what was in his bag when he left it in the school room is
what he brought to school. We as politicians have to be
very careful especially when we have young children. We
get in this Assembly and talk about the wrongs of people,
but things can be planted to embarrass us. You, Mr. Deputy
Speaker, are in the same position as myself, you have a
young child too, and we must make sure that we do not
pas3..Aside.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: There is nothing wrong
with having young children. It is no crime. There is no
crime in us having young children, but at the same time we
must make sure that when we pzss legislation in this
Assenbly this legislation is not used, as the Honourable
Attorney General said, that my friend who is a good
policeman- and I have no reason to doubt his statistics for
the north, and I want to clear something here, because
whcn one hears about the north one gets the impression
that the north is St. Lucy, but when the Police Force is
talking about the north they are not talking about St. Lucy,
and I wish the Attorney General would explain that - I do
not want the impression given that when the Senior
Superintendent speaks he is talking about St. Lucy. Let
there be no shadow of doubt. It is not St. Lucy he is
talking about, he is talking about the north, and that is what
the police constitute as thc north and not the north as I
would know it. I want that matlcr to be clcar.
Getting back to this legislation, Sir, it will show that
the Minister has some doubts on this legislation also. In
Section 2(5) there is (a), (b) and (c), which tells me that
after (a) there is a possibility it will happen again, and after
(b) it will happen again, so it is telling me that the
legislation is not really correcting the problem. I am saying
this, Sir. I do not know of a child who can afford to work
to get money to buy a gun. He has to be getting money
from some senior person. The drugs that the children are
taking to school I want also to know who they are getting
them from. I am saying to this Assembly that our target is
wrong. It is not the school children we want to target, it is
the big people in society who are giving the school children
guns and drugs and making sure that they give them guns
and drugs to protect territory. Are you going to tcll me
little children will think about carrying to school guns and
drugs just because they want to carry to school guns and
drugs?

Hon. D. A. C. SIMMONS: On a point of order, Mr.
Deputy Speakcr. I will just remind my friend, so that he
can intersperse it in his speech, that there is already
legislation that deals with the big people. The Drugs
Misuse Act, the Proceeds of Crime Act and the Firearms
Act.
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I
want to tllank the Attorney General again, but it is clear to
me that the same legislation hc is talking about cannot be
working, because if it was working we would not be hcre
today discussing this, we would have had those people in
check and they would not bc inlcrfcring with our kids,
giving them guns and drugs to take to school. So it is
proven in this Assembly that legislation is not the solver of
these problems and we need to takc another step. I am
sorry that the Honourable Member for St. Joseph spoke
early because if he had spoken after he could not have
made that speech. He is praising legislation like this when
we woultl undcrstand that the legislation is not solving the
problem. We had a Vagrancy Act to stop people from
putting chains around white people’s neck and every day in
the slrects of Barbados thcy are still doing it. So what are
you saying to me? We need to get to basics.

We nccd to get back to the grandparents of the
children, the mothers and the godmothers and the next door
neighbours who used to look after you and me. These days
now WC have people who divide the room and nobody
cares about one another. We need to get back to the good
old habits and once we gct back to the good old habits thcn
we will be doing something. Anybody who sees my son
doing something wrong can flog him, bccausc I still bclong
to that old school. As I said at St. Clement’s School, we are
bringing a lot of policies in place that are not hclping our
school childrcn. I was vcry gratcful to thc Honourable
Mcmbcr for St. Joscph whcn he said that thc headmasters’
hands wcrc tied.
Yes, they were tied because of the 1981 Education
Act. If you feel they were tied then, do you feel they will
administer this? They are going to tell you straight that
when they wanted power they were starved for 15 years
and they are dealing with a different group of people now.
In 1981, they were dealing with saints, and if you are
telling me from the information you are giving now about
guns and drugs, do you think they will want to deal with
those children now? Do you feel you can get the
cooperation of the headmasters? We have to be very
careful. We are slowly creating a police state in this
country because even the teacher now is a policeman. We
have to be very careful because there was a time in the 90s
when a big ad was placed in ~arbados giving the
impression that we were under a police state and at that
time the teachers were not regarded as constables. Now
they are regarded as constables.

Let me tell you something. I am under the impression
that any of my constituents who are hooked by this
legislation - I am not looking to the lawyers on this side -
I know of at least 3 lawyers on the back bench who will go
to court and argue successfully that this is unconstitutional.
So that is my problem, too. This is unconstitutional. So
even though the ones who are here believe it, I would add
the 3 behind there and get 6 lawyers who know that it is
unconstitutional. There are some on the front bench too,
but they have to toe the line.
You see, Mr. Deputy Speaker, everyone matters. That
bad child that you regard as a bad child might be bad today
but tomorrow he caq be a good student. We have to be
very careful how we deal with these kids. I am telling you,
Mr. Deputy Speaker, there were a lot of children in this
country who were regarded as bad boys and now today
they are some of the most important people in this country.
They are some of the people to whom people look up and
they are some of the people who are making sure that the
bad boys are put in check.

We must ask ourselves if we can afford to pass
legislation in this Assembly which says that you must not
forgive and forget. As this legislstion stands, it is saying
that you must not forgive. We must have a clcan heart. I
am saying that I understand exactly the problem the
Minister has and I understand and I know that she cares
about young people and that is why it worries me, Sir. I
nearly ran a bet. I am convinced that the Minister will have
to have second lhoughls on this. It is an amendment under
the Ministry of Education, but it seems to me that this
cannot be an education bill. Something is telling me that
even though it is under the Ministry of Education it was
not formulated in the Ministry of Education and I rest my
case there, Sir.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Mr. Deputy Speaker, I do
not intend to speak too long on this Bill but, Sir, it would
be very wrong for me not to comment on this Bill. When
one listened to the comments of the previous speakers one
would have heard that this Bill would drive business from
underground and increase the revenue take of the country.

One has to ask, Sir, when you speak about driving business
from underground whom are you speaking about, Sir? I
would have preferred to hear, Sir, about the suitcase trade
and I would have preferred to hear that with the
implementation of this VAT Bill those small traders would
be greatly affected by this Bill.

For years, Sir, in this country we have been hearing
the private sector asking various Governments to put a tax
system in place that would level the playing field and I
want to tell you today, Sir, that the playing field has
been levelled on behalf of big business in this
country and we have to be very careful about this, Sir,
because if we, as a Parliament, are going to implement a
tax system and certain people in this country are going to
be going around saying that this is a progressive Bill then
we must ask ourselves if this Bill is not regressive for the
small man in this country because whenever a Bill is
progressive for the big business sector it is obvious that it
has to be regressive for the small business sector. I am
- saying that 15% on the small man will be regressive. That is why I am a bit worried. The Honourable Member for St.

Michael South Central alluded to it earlier. We have not
heard any comments coming from the private sector as we
would normally hear them whenever a new tax is
introduced. One can understand why, Sir, they are not
quarelling about this new VAT tax, because for years they
have been calling for this to happen and it has happened
today and it is about to happen officially in January 1997
and we, Sir, as a Parliament have to be very careful even
though we need to have a system where taxes can be
collected fairly.

We also, Sir, have a system where the small man has
never complained about the luxury tax and there are people
who would brag and say that we would not have to pay the
luxury tax anymore. Neither would you hear the small man
complaining about the 89% consumption tax. Sir, for years
the small man has been involved in bringing clothing into
this country and has never complained about the taxes. It
has always been the big business people in Bridgetown
who have been complaining and one has to ask, Sir, if this
measure is progressive or regressive in favour of the small
man.

As I said, Sir, I did not intend to say much and I
intend not to say much. All I would like to end on, Sir, is
that the Prime Minister said that there will be some tax
overflows and that the tax overflows will go to the tourism
sector. I am asking the Prime Minister to make sue that
some of the tax overflows we are going to get from VAT
be passed to the small business sector or the small man as
I normally refer to them. -

I would like to say, Sir, we have heard many
estimates about how much money will be collected by
VAT, but I am willing to make a bet, Sir, that at the end
of the day any Government will have about $100 million
to pldy with when VAT is implemented and I am saying,
if you are goicg to have about $100 million additional
dollars it is but fair that instead of giving all of this money
or some of this money to the tourism sector the small man
in this country be recognised and be compensated for what
he has done for this country.

On Tuesday we were told in this Assembly that it is
always the small man who is prepared to go and start
investments in the Scotland District, in Speightstown, in
Baxters Road, in Carlisle Bay, in St. Lawrence Gap. We
were also told that it is when tax concessions are given that
it is the big man who gets involved and runs out the small
man. So we, as a Govemment, Sir, cannot be passing Bills
to make sure that the small man will always be depressed.
Sir, I would like to hear about these concessions. It
is amazing I have been watching the flow, Sir. A Minister
of Government said in this Assembly that the highest
bidder must always get everything and when I went back
to the IADB report I saw that in there and I want to know
if we are going to be blindly following the IADB to
oppress the poor man in this country. If we are going to be
doing that I am not going to take part in that charade, Sir.
Thank you very much.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Mr. Speaker, this evening
I rise to speak on this Bill which provides for the
designation of Special Development Areas and for related
matters. When one looks at the areas that are supposed to
be designated as special development areas, one would
have thought that these areas, seeing that they were in
existence for so long … You take Speightstown. One would
not believe that in the 90s we would be dealing with the
narrow area of Speightstown as a special development area,
seeing that over the years it has been the centre of
attraction, the area where people come together. One would
believe that we would be looking at a Bill that would be
expanding Speightstown. One would expect as we had
started previously in the 70s and the 80s where we decided
that in developing Speightstown that we would look further
wrth and develop areas in Checker Hall and Heywoods.
Aside.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN. Sir, the Prime Minister
might laugh and talk about Checker Hall in Speightstown,
but that is why the word “Speightstown” should not have
been used. We should have been talking about a special
development area in the north of Barbados which runs from
Checker Hall in St. Lucy, Benn Hill in St. Peter, down to
Speightstown and probably to as far south as Gibbes. You
cannot expect to have the type of development that you are
talking about in Speightstown without putting the necessary
infrastructure in those areas. In an area that is less than a
mile in length or width you are asking for all of this
development and the areas around Speightstown not having
the necessary development, so that when this development
comes to Speightstown then you have to channel it back to
Bridgetown.

We need a map to see when we are talking about
Speightstown whether it is just the narrow Speightstown or
whether you are talking about Six Men’s also. History will
tell us that it was at Six Men’s, not Speightstown, where
the commercial activity started, and we cannot have a
special development area that ignores Six Men’s. Six Men’s
must be part of the special development area.
Hon. Miss B. A. MILLER: Mr. Speaker, on a point
of order. The area delineated for Speightstown reads as
follows: Six Men’s on both sides of the new highway to the
limit ~f Road View in a southerly direction.
Mr. SPEAKER: Is that the same Six Men’s?
Hon. Miss B. A. MILLER: Yes, Sir. The same Six
Men’s, it is no other half dozen.
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Thank you very much. I
can always rely on the Deputy to counteract what is said
by the Prime Minister. When I mentioned Checker Hall
they asked me what Checker Hall has to do with
Speightstown. Now they tell me Six Men’s has something
to do with Speightstown. Do you understand the difficulty,
Mr. Speaker? I am not going to allow them to narrow me
to Speightstown, I am saying that, seeing we have
development already in Checker Hall with the Cement
Plant, and seeing that there is enough space starting from
Bern Hill right down to Speightstown which would also
allow us to give a special investment to those people who
are interested in buying the St. Joseph Hospital, because,
let us face it, we must have St. Joseph Hospital and St.
Joseph Hospital must be included in the special
development area. I believe there is no argument about that
on the Other Side. They must admit that we must get St.
Joseph Hospital into Speightstown Special Development
Plan. The same way that Road View is in, from Benn Hill
right down must be in, because the type of development I
am seeing for the north of Barbados must include these
areas. If we do not include them, then we will be wasting
money and time.

If you really want to help poor people, then you will
give these poor people running from the Arawak Cement
Plant right down to Speightstown the opportunity to get
special incentives and develop that whole coastline. Let us
face facts, Sir. If these incentives are put in place from the
Arawak Cement Plant down to Road View, including the
special development area, the necessary incentives to create
employment in this country will be gotten. We cannot keep
putting our eggs in one basket, we have been putting our
eggs in these baskets now for a long time. From the time
I was born I have been hearing about development for
Speightstown, Bridgetown, Carlisle Bay and the Christ
Church area and the time is right for a special development
area to be also at North Point Hotel. We have evidence
now. It is a myth that they only have great swimmers in
the south. It is time that the North Point Hotel be reopened
and be designated a special development area so that the
pool could be back in use in St. Lucy, so that the great
swimmers in St. Lucy get the opportunity too, to get to the
Olympics and not try to win a gold, but to win golds. The
best swimmers are in the north of Barbados. They swim in
those seas over there, and I am telling you when it comes
to the pool they will do better. So I am saying that the
special development areas must include St. Lucy, and if St.
Lucy is not included I cannot suppp-t this. Let me tell you
something. The Honourable Member for Christ Church
West has suggested in this Assembly today that it should
not stop at Bay C&reet or Garrison Hill, it should go right
up to Christ Church. I agree with that. I have no problem
with that. I would expect him to support me, that instead of
it just going south, it goes north also.
Aside.
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Apply? I am applying all
like now. Places like Ellerton …
Aside.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: You all are famous for
putting seas in those places. Redman’s Village is another
good area to be a special development area If one looks at
what is going on in that area, one will see that if the
necessary infrastructure is put in, there is a lot of potential
to create tourist related jobs.
Aside.
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: I am talking about
Redman’s Village, I am talking about’ where the poor
people live, not at Warrens where the rich people live. I am
spealung on behalf of the poor, so I would like you to
leave me alone and let me speak on behalf of the people on
whose behalf I am always spe3king. If you want it at
Warrens where the rich people are, that is up to you, but I
am speaking about Redrnan’s Village. The problem with the
Barbados Labour Party is that they are always talking
about the airport for St. Lucy, but let me tell you
somzthing. Any good politician must not be limited to a
narrow view.

Any good politician must be able to expand his
knowledge and go into the future. Let me tell you all - something, this foolishness you talk all the time about I am
always talking about an airport for St. Lucy, if we had
serious problems at the airport, ,do you know what would
happen with tourism in this country? I am saying, Sir, that
any country that depends on tourism should not limit itself
to one airport. I am saying that if as the Honourable
Minister said that he had to extend this and that and call
for $43 million and $80 million, why expend $80 million
to extend when you can build a new one with the same
amount of money?
I am saying to all those who have problems with my
talking about an airport for St. Lucy, that is their problem.
I am clear in my mind and I know exactly what is in the
interests of Barbados and when I speak on behalf of the
people of St. Lucy they understand exactly what I am
speaking about. So you see, Mr. Speaker, I heard the
Honourable Member for St. George North on this Special
Development Areas Bill speaking about drainage, but I
would like him to know that we have a problem in Pie
Corner which is a flood prone area, also Archers, Crab
Hill, Hope Road, Spring Garden, checker Hall, Rockfield,
- the Risk, Lamberts, Maycocks Terrace, Northumberland and there is another problem that I want you all to solve
shortly, because this is the hurricane season and if you are
talking about special development areas you also have to
think about if we have a hurricane. In the western side of
St. Lucy there is no hurricane shelter. The Half Moon Fort
School is in need of repairs. It used to be a hurricane
she ter and now it is not. So the westward side of St. Lucy
- St. Thomas is in the east but I am talking about Half
Moon Fort in the west.

I heard members in here talking about beautiful
churches and they forget to mention St. Lucy’s Parish
Church. When you are speaking about beautiful churches
you must speak about the best. Have you visited St. Lucy
lateiy? So how can you visit St. Lucy and ignore the fact
that St. Lucy’s Church is now the best looking church in
Barbados?
Aside.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: St. Clement’s will get there
soon. You see, Mr. Speaker, we have a situation in
Barbados where areas that we should not have been
ignoring by now we are still talking about. There is no way
that we should be still taking about developing
Speightstowr, when in the 70s Mr. Barrow was putting a
hotel in the environs of Speightstown, when he had other
developments for Speightstown. You know the problem in
Speightstown is that there are some Prime Ministers who
cannot understand what other Prime Ministers are doing.
I would say this, Sir, that the way the Speightstown
Bypass Road ended up was a bad stroke and I would also
say because it was mentioned in here about a fishing
harbour again for Speightstown and I am saying that if a
fishing harbour is placed. ..

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: … it was mentioned. You
have to have good memory when you are in this House. If
a fishing harbour is placed where it was supposed to be
placed it is going to spoil the development of
Speightstown. What I am suggesting for Speightstown, and
I know the Prime Minister will agree. with me, is that
where the present fish market is that the land to the west
of that be reclaimed, that we expand Speightstown to the
west, and that we build the jetty that the Prime Minister
promised to build for the people in Speightstown and the
North of Barbados. He has my support on that. There is no
doubt about it. I am saying that you cannot keep the fishing
harbour in the middle of Speightstown. It must be moved
and put somewhere else.

Mr. Speaker, the Honourable Member for St. James
North did not mention anything for St. James North. He
has spoken already and I hope he realises that there is a lot
of potential for St. James North and that he has to please
the investors in St. James North too. I was saying that
when one looks at the Scotland District one must agree that
the Scotland District is one genuine area out of the four
that needs special development, there is no doubt in my
mind, and an interesting point was made today and that is
that all the development in the Scotland District was done
by poor people. There was a rebuttal by my friend the
Honourable Member for St. James North and he said that
the reason why there was no development in the Scotland
District is because there were no incentives.
Mr. Speaker, it hurts, because it is telling me that we
have to live with a private sector in this country, Sir, who
can only get involved in development when the country is
giving it something and that the private sector is not
prepared to invest unless there is something called an
incentive coming from Government and that is hurtful, Sir,
because I believe that any caring private sector would look
after the unemployed and they would get involved in
projects that are also capable not only of making money
but also to employ people of Barbados.

When that statement was made, Sir, I had to ponder
on it. I am saying, that if that is true all the development
that has to go on in the Scotland District should be
given to the poor people and the Prime Minister should
make sure that the necessary finances are put in place for
poor people to continue to develop the Scotland District,
not people who are prepared to come and sit on the backs
of poor people and then try to buy them out.
We have to be very careful because in these 4 areas
what you are going to see is that these special incentives
are going to encourage the so-called rich to come in and
get more power to purchase the properties of the poor
people who have been developing the area without
incentives. So we have to make sure that incentives are not
used against the poor people, because if you empower the
rich more, all they are going to do is purchase from the
poor man and they are going to push him out.
Asides.

Mr. D. StE. KELLMAN: So I am saying, Mr.
Speaker, that we must be careful that when we are
designating areas as Special Development Areas we must
think through the proposals and we must be sure that at the
end of the day what we set about to do we achieve. What
I am saying here, Sir, is that the reverse is going to
happen, that the poor people in these areas who have been
holding these areas and developing them at their own pace,
are sooner or later going to be pushed out by people who
can do without the incentives, but who will be getting the
incentives.

Another area in St. Lucy that is right for
development, Sir, is the Naval Base Facility. There is a lot
of history. I heard the Honourable Member for the City this
maing talking about the caves, bridges and the tunnels.
I would ask her to go the Naval Base Facility, Sir, and find
out if what she is talking about are not there also. I will
also ask her to check and see if our problem with our
North American tourists could not be solved by developing
the North Point Surf Resort.

We talk about tourism, and sometimes we tend to
forget what people are looking for. The British come to
Barbados because they see Barbados as Little Bristol and
because we have cricket and they can identify with cricket.
The only thing in Barbados for the Americans could
identify with is the Naval Base, and we have never
exploited that, Sir.
The time is right, Sir, that we start exploiting that
facility. We can do the reversal. It is time that we remind
Americans that this is part of their history. The Naval Base
is part of the history of the Americans and we have to use
that facility, Sir, to make sure that we tap into the North
American market, Sir.

I do not believe, Sir, that because the Naval Base is
beyond the Judge Gap, the other side has decided they are
not going to encourage anybody to get involved in that
project. Listening to the Honourable Deguty Prime Minister
again, Sir, Six Men’s is up to the Judge Gap. NCC can
only see development up to the Judge Gap. Now the
Ministry of Tourism is only seeing development up to the
Judge Gap. It is time, Sir, that the Prime Minister tells his
Ministers that St. Lucy must get its fair share of any
development that is coming to Barbados. It is about time
that all of the development that is happening in Barbados
not only stops at the Judge Gap. It worries me, Sir. By
chance I could have been the representative for the Prime
Minister because he has strong roots in St. Lucy. His
grandfather’s navel string is buried in Pie Corner, and that
is why I cannot understand why he allows his Ministers to
treat that beautiful constituency the way they do.
Asides.

Mr. D. St. E, KELLMAN: He likes his grandfather.
I will not get involved in that. I will not agree with you, he
likes his grandfather. I know that he will scold the
Ministers. Do not get involved in this. This is Northern
Access Road here now.
Asides.
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN. Mr. Speaker I am saying,
Sir, that you cannot have development in Speightstown and
ignore St. Lucy. Neither can you ignore St. Andrew nor
ignore St. Joseph, nor St. James North. I am suprised at the
Honourable Member for St. James North, as one of my
parliamentary representatives - because I have two of them
- I thought that he would have been defending the interest
of the people of St. James North. Not once has he done it,
even though I was begging him. I begged him to mention
St. James North. He is forgetting that he is my
parliamentary representative.

Hon. R. C. EASTMOND: Mr. Speaker, I really do
not want to interrupt the Honourable Member but, on a
point of order, this debate is about a particular matter under
the rules governing relevance I tried in my contribution
today to be as relevant as possible, quite unlike what the
Member for Sr. Lucy is doing.
Mr. SPEAKER: Thanks, but he is trying also.
Mr. D St. E. KELLMAN: Mr. Speaker, I am
extremely grateful to the Honourable Member for St. James
North for telling me that there are no areas in St. James
North to be dassified as Special Development Areas. Now
I will speak *o my friends from St. James North about that
matter, Sir, because he is saying that there is nothing
relevant about St. James North. You heard him, Sir,
and you said that I would get to relevance and I did just
now.

So you see, Mr. Speaker, we have places like Six
Roads, and I believe that the Members of St. Philip South
and North would agree with me that they are good areas
that can be classified as Special Development Areas. The
necessary infrasmcture is there, they just need the
incentives. Once the incentives are put in place, Sir, I
believe that these are areas that can help with the
unemployment situation we have in the country today, Sir.
We cannot ignore a place like Nesfield, Sir, which
happens to be the centre of St. Lucy, and we have already
the Atlantic Manufacturing plant there. With the necessary
infrastructure and investment, I believe these areas will
give us the necessary development that we would like, Sir.
You know, Sir, Mr. Speaker, I will not forget you.
Around the Howard Supermarket area is another good area,
because the development has already been started.
Mr. SPEAKER: This is Bush Hall you are talking - about.
Mr. D, St. E. KELLMAN: Yes, Bush Hall. The
development has already been started, Sir, by these poor
people who do not run away from the country when it is in
crisis. They stay and they fight and fight and they help the
Prime Minister. I know that like the businessmen in the
North you would also like to see areas in your constituency
designated as Special Development Areas. -

Sir, I would like to see that in this Bill, Sir, instead of
having narrow areas like Speightstown, we talk about the
areas from Road View stretching to the Arawak Cement
Company or North Point, or something like that, but not
just Speightstown, Sir. If you put Speightstown, here, one
would expect you to come further down and explain what
you mean by Speighstown.
- The same thing with St. Lawrence Gap and Carlisle Bay development. These names should really be removed,
Sir, and be given a map of these other areas because we do
not want to be back two years in 1999 or the year 2000
saying that we are going to extend it to Checker Hall or the
North Point Surf Resort. We want it in such a way that you
give a wide area and you phase in the development, if
anything, Sir.
So, I am saying, Sir, that if the people of St. Lucy are

to get any benefits from these special designated areas, the
changes and the necessary investment and infrastructure
must be put in place. What you would get, Sir, is that
Speightstown would get development and, if I have a say,
Sir, you will get a lot of development, but then you would
not have any place for the spill over.
I am saying that if you are getting cruise liners
coming into Speightstown, if you are getting tourists
coming into Speightstown, Sir, you cannot keep it in one
narrow area. You must put it beyond Speightstown so that
everybody in that area can enjoy the benefits from the
development.
Sir, we do not want a situation where people believe
that everything is being placed in Speightstown and St.
Lucy is being neglected. We want to believe that Barbados
belongs to us, Sir, and that we are working in the interest
of everybody in Barbados.
So until they can give me a commitment that they are
prepared to amend this Bill, I cannot support it as it stands
right now, Sir.

Thank you.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Mr. Speaker, when one
listens to the other side one would not believe that we went
through a debate a couple months ago dealing with national
insurance when I made a case for the returning nationals to
at least get $20. Because, Mr. Speaker, I had to remind this
House that there were a lot of nationals who have returned
to Barbados who sent back all of their money to Barbados,
who provided jobs in Barbados for Barbadian citizens and
they were begging the Government to acknowledge them.
I said at that time, Sir, even $20.00 would have been a help
to those people. As one listened to the other side today
they would give the impression that all the
overseas nationals who have returned that they have looked
after those people.
car is purchased overseas the only people that you can
help, Mr. Speaker, are the people overseas.

Sir, if I go into Broomfield tonight, there are people
who would have sent back money to Barbados and who
would be still asking me to ask the Government to look
after them too, because they have contributed to the
Treasury of Barbados. But that is not all, Sir. When I look
at these proposals, Sir, and it is not only in Broomfield,
Sir. We are speaking also about Mount View. We are also
speaking of people in Pie Corner, Josey Hill and all
through St. Lucy there are still people who have returned
to Barbados, returned with their money and what is
regrettable about this is that those people came back to
Barbados and they did not ask the Government for any
waiver of taxes, nothing like that. They came back to
Barbados at their own bee will and we did nothing for
those people and that is regrettable.

Every year, Sir, we have Barbadians going to Canada
and America, bringing back foreign exchange and begging
Customs to ease them with a radio and we hear nothing
about those people and now I hear the Honourable Member
for St. George South telling me that they might change it.
I will hold him to his words for that, Sir. Also the ones
cutting canes and picking fruit. Mr. Speaker, they are
returning nationals too. I do not see anything in here for
those people.
Mr. Speaker, that is not all.
Hon. Miss B. A. MILLER: Mr. Speaker, on a point
of order, please. For the benefit of the Honourable Member
for St. Lucy, Sir. I have gone to the trouble to provide
booklets. It is all here. What he is describing does not fall
within the definition of a returning national.
Mr. Speaker, Sir, I have no problem with this. I am
clear about this. You remember the Japanese loans that I
spoke about, Mr. Speaker? This Government has a policy
of giving money to people overseas and I am totally
against that. I am saying that they could have achieved the
same thing, Mr. Speaker, by allowing these nice people,
that I have already spoken for.
Aside.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Abuse? I have never been
abusive to them. It is foolishness. It is not in their interest. .
Mr. Speaker, these nice people should be allowed to come
back to Barbados and if they feel like buying a plane duty
free they should have the right once it is manufactured in
Barbados so that they can help to employ their cousins,
their nieces and nephews. Give them the right to buy what
they like that is manufactured in Barbados or being sold in
Barbados.
Can you imagine you are telling returning nationals to
buy furniture by people who cannot even make furniture.
Can you imagine these returning nationals have a good
opportunity to come back to Barbados, go down to Mr.
Kirton and get some nice beautiful furniture and what we
are saying to them, to take second hand furniture from
people in England who cannot make furniture and not
support our local Barbadians. I am saying, Mr. Speaker,
that we should have a policy in place where those returning
nationals, when they come to Barbados, could go and look
for the best furniture and get them at a good price, no duty
paid on them. That is what I call positive thinking, Mr.

Speaker.
Mr. SPEAKER: Proceed orderly, please.
Mr. SPEAKER: Order. Please let us hear the
Honourable Member.
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Mr. Speaker, a returning
national is a returning national, no matter how they return.
That is my interpretation. Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, this is
serious business. What we want in Barbados, Sir, is
investment so that the people in St. George South, those
youngsters, could get some employment and what I see
here, Sir, living room suite, dining room suite, kitchen,
bathroom, television, satellite dish, all made overseas and
nothing to employ my poor people in Barbados,
foolishness, Mr. Speaker.
Let me tell you what we would expect, Mr. Speaker.
What we would expect is a programme where we say to
the returning nationals, if you bring your money back to
Barbados you have a right to get a car duty free. Let me
tell you why, Sir. If the car is purchased in Barbados you
can guarantee a job for the people in St. Joseph. You can
guarantee a job for the people in St. James South but if a
Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: Mr. Speaker, can you
imagine this is supposed to be a proposal to ask people to
bring money back to Barbados and there is no incentive in .
this document, Mr. Speaker, that would encourage anybody
to take his money from England to bring back to Barbados.
What I am proposing, Sir, and I hope the Prime
Minister is listening, that a special piece of paper be
created where, when the returning nationals come back that
they can get that investment at a better rate which is better
than in the United Kingdom, the United States, wherever.

Let me tell you why, Sir. I was in here early for your
speech. Mr. Speaker, the returning nationals must know
that we love them so much that when they get back to
Barbados, that if England was paying 10% then we should
be paying 12%, 13% or 14%. Do you know why, Sir?
At the end of the day Barbados would gain and the
returning nationals would gain too. The boys on the block,
Mr. Speaker, in Quany Road, they would gain too, Mr.
Speaker. But these proposals have nothing for the boys on
the block, Sir.

You are asking a returning national to come back to Barbados to build a big house, satellite dish, and air
conditioning. He passes the boys on the block with his
Mercedes and you know the first thing that is going to
- happen. Jealousy will be created. We cannot create any
jealousy in Barbados, Mr. Speaker. We must create an
atmosphere where the boys on the block feel they are all
one with the returning nationals and when the returning
nationals live in their lovely homes that they must feel that
the boys on the block will guard their houses for them
instead of being jealous.

Mr. Speaker, I am saying that those youngsters that
you find in Fitts Village or Haynesville cannot gain
anything by someone bringing back a Mercedes. She had
better not let me talk to those guys in Haynesville because
you know how it is with Haynesville. So you see, Mr.
Speaker, we are at the crossroad today where I honestly
beheve that the Government meant to get something out of
the proposal but it was badly drafted and presented to the
Prime Minister. I know, Sir, being a CP boy that he would
not accept these proposals as they are. He cannot because - these proposals do not allow the guys in Mile and a
Quarter or in Speightstown or Checker Hall or anywhere in
Barbados to gain anything. They do not allow the returning
nationals to gain anything anyhow because they always had
a car and their furniture and I do not see how you can
encourage somebody to buy second quality furniture when
we have furniture makers in Barbados who can make the
best furniture in the world. I cannot understand how we can
get concessions for things like these.

Mr. Speaker, let me tell you something. There are a - lot of poor people and there is a lot of money to come out
of England. If we are asking people to come out of
England, we must ask the people to bring the money out of
England and not for them to come to Barbados and leave
the money overseas. I am not going to fool anybody that
this proposal does attract investment to Barbados and what
we need at this point in time is the right climate to attract
the investment by the returning nationals so that when they
come back to. Barbados they will bring back the necessary
cash to invest in our banks or to invest in business.
I am saying that the Government is talking about
selling the Hilton. Yes, I understand that they plan to sell
the Hilton and the Hilton is a good investment. So sell it to
the returning nationals. That is one sure way of bringing
the money out of England. As it stands now, Sir, there is
no work and let me tell you something. They can give
them special incentives to buy the hotel at North Point and
I will back them and I will help and negotiate on their
behalf or if they want to go to the Naval Base and get a
hotel down there, Sir, I will help them also. But do not fool
these nice people that you are doing so much for them
when at the end of the day all you are telling them is that
you are giving them a car and furniture. Do not fool these
people because I know people who came back to Barbados
and had the right of a duty free car. I also know of people
who returned and brought back furniture without paying
duty, so it is nothing new. That is why, Sir, I had to tear
this up because there is nothing new in this. I want
something that is new and something that can help these
people. This grandstanding and public relations programme
to set up a branch in England, I am not party to that
because not even my Party could do this to people.

If the Democratic Labour Party had done this, I would have to
criticize them too. You know that I am plain speaking. No
grandstanding on the poor people’s back and I am surprised
at the Honourable Member for St. George South because I
had expected him to speak after me and not before.
Because had he spoken after me, he could not have made
that speech and he would have had to support what I said
instead of him cheering me on about the good society after
he had made his s ‘ i h he would then have to get up and
support me. But, Mr. Speaker, I am .saying to returning
nationals that all of those who want to cheer this, cheer
this. But I am telling you that 5 years after being in
Barbados if what I said is not implemented, you will be
packing up and leaving. I am saying that we do not want
you to leave. If you come here with good intentions, bring
everything. Bring your bank accounts to Barbados and we
will find the right investment climate for it.
There is no sense anybody fooling anybody. We are
talking dollars and cents for the returning nationals and we
are talking dollars and cents for Barbadians. I am saying
that once the investment is here the guys on the block have
hope. If the investment is not here, there is no hope for the
boys on the block. So I cannot understand how my friend
from St. Philip North was able to get up and support this
when this proposal which has the capacity to generate jobs
if it is properly instituted for the people of St. Philip North.
I know that your heart is with me, Sir, on this proposal
because once I am talking jobs you want some for your
constituen ts… I know that even though you cannot speak in
this debate, Sir, that you would like to tag along with me
on this one. So I am asking that the right investment
climate be created so that the boys in St. Michael Central
will get some of these jobs too. I will not leave you out.
Your friends will leave you out, but do not worry because
I will speak for you.
Mr. SPEAKER: Thank you.

Mr. D. St. E. KELLMAN: So I am asking the
returning nationals to go back and put a fresh set
of proposals after they have heard a set of proposals that
make sense because the ones I heard before, and I will be
honest with you, reminded me as something hatched by the
private sector in this country. Let me tell you something,
Mr. Speaker. You do not understand sometimes how things
operate. Our bright students are given jobs and the first
thing they are given is a salary, then they are given a car
or a car loan and then they are given a mortgage or a
house. After they receive those things, they tell you that
they cannot take risks. This is exactly what the private
sector did to our bright students and the Government is
now doing to the returning nationals - a pretty picture just
to tie them. I am saying that in the same way we allow the
bright students to go and set up their own business and
they will create more employment for people, if we give
these nice people the right incentives these people will
employ every unemployed person in Barbados because they
have the investment that they can bring to Barbados. But
as it stands now they will not bring it because there is no
need to bring it. The only thing they need to bring to
Barbados right now as it stands from these proposals is a
car and household fittings. Yes, Mr. Speaker, that is the
only thing they need to do. As it stands now, they can
leave their money in England and come back here and
draw a cheque every month for what they need.
I cannot believe these proposals. I cannot even patch
it back together because they are worthless. You see, Mr.
Speaker, it is regrettable that in 19% that we can have such
flimsy proposals and you know what we need right now is
investments. We do not need people with cars and
furniture. So I do not know how you can try and fool
people that you care so much about them and you want
them to bring back cars and furniture. Tell them the truth.
You want their money. That is the bottom line and you
want the money to help create jobs for Barbadians and that
is the truth, the honest truth and the only truth that I know
and they know it too, Sir. They know that they will not be
fooled by these proposals.

I am saying, Sir, that I have confidence in the Prime
Minister that he will put the necessary instrument in place
to make sure that the money will be removed from England
and he will reverse the proposal of his Deputy and put his
own proposals in place. I have confidence in the Prime
Minister. I have confidence in him to reverse this and I
know in the same way that I have done this, to this, that he
has already burnt his. I am sure of that, Sir. I am sure that
he has burnt his already because it is empty and it offers
nothing to the returning nationals or to the people of
Barbados. Do you ‘doubt me? I am asking the Prime
Minister to do this. I am giving the Prime Minister one
second to produce his and, if he does not produce it, I am
certain that it is in the garbage bin already.
You see, it has not been produced. It is in the garbage
bin already.

I am saying, Sir, that the Prime Minister cannot
accept these proposals because they have no financhi
benefits to him or the country or the returning nationals.
The private sector cannot accept these proposals because
they have nodbenefit to them or their employees. The guys
on the block cannot accept these proposals because they
have no benefit to them. The returning nationals cannot
accept these proposals because they have no benefit to
them either. The 30 000 unemployed people cannbt accept
these proposals because they have no benefit to them and
the young children in school who are coming out this year
cannot accept these proposals because they have no benefit
to them.

If I take these proposals into my constituency and ask
them if these things were implemented, how many jobs
would be created, do you know what they would tell me
without even thinking - zero. That is a serious thing. If we
are going to have a charter and it is supposed to be so
great and grand we must be able to see something positive
from it but the days of these negative things, how can you
expect something positive from the youth, Sir, when we
expect to produce these negative things. The young people
are thinking and when you go in Quarry Road tonight as I
know you are going and you ask them the question how
many jobs will we get from this, I know you will get zero.
I know you are going to come back to me and you are
going to say that I was right. If the bank accounts came to
Barbados and you ask these guys in Quany Road what
hope they have they will say we have a lot of hope because
there 1s money in Barbados and there can be investment,
but if you bring a Mercedes, I cannot see the investment.
The only investment in there for a Mercedes as my father
would tell you is a car wash. You are telling me that the
only thing that we can offer Barbadians is a car wash job?
Even now you can drive through the mechanical car wash.
So you see, there is no hope for the youngsters.

I am saying that we must be realistic and we must
acknowledge that sometimes we have good intentions but
you do not gain what you set about to gain. You must
admit that you have made an error and there is nothing
wrong with my congratulating the Prime Minister for
destroying the proposal of his Deputy. I would congratulate
him 10 times for doing it because he has a right when he
sees foolishness to tear it up like me. If he does not get up
and denounce this proposal, well, then, I will have to
withdraw my congratulations from him. I hope he doesn’t
disappoint me because as he know I will give him credit
when it is due but if he does not denounce what has been
done in here today I cannot give him the credit.
Sir, I am hoping that the proposals be looked at again.
It is very disappointing that these honourable men and
women have to spend so much money coming from
London etc. to come to Barbados to hear a televised
debate and at the end of the day they cannot tell anybody
that they stand to gain anything from these proposals. I
must apologise for them, Sir, but I hope that the next time
that they come back that the proposals will be revamped,
re-presented and, of course, if the Dems had done this they
would not even have had to fly from London. There would
be no need because they would be solid proposals that
from the time they got them in London they would be - packing and everything would be in Barbados already, bank
accounts, everything.
You see, the problem with some people is they want
to paint a pretty picture and behind the picture there is an
empty scene and that is exactly what we got from these
proposals today, Sir. I am saying that I hope that the
. people in Eden Lodge will acknowledge that there is a
better life and that the proposals presented in here today
could not present a better life for them and that they will
deal with those people who are cheering on and making
people believe that they can get jobs out of a Mercedes or
out of furniture or a satellite dish.
Mr. Speaker, I know you do not support that. I know
the people in Barbados, the poor people who are looking to
get those jobs, those poor people when they heard about so
many people coming back started seeing it as if we were
getting thousands of tourists coming to Barbados. But at
the end of the day, no work. Do you understand how it
feels to have a little hope and then when you really look
through the proposals to see an empty promise. Do you
imagine the type of pressure you will be under when you
go in Quany Road because all over the television you get
the impression that this was the best idea that ever
happened to Barbados and the 30 000-job problem was
solved, but it is clear today further than the 30 000-jobs
being sought that we might be having a climate in
Barbados where the unemployment rate might be increased
because 50 000 returning plus 30 000 is 80 000. Thank you
very much, Sir.

MORE FUN AND PRIZES TO GIVE AWAY TO TOURISTS AND LOCALS AT SATURDAY NIGHT’S BANKS BEER PROMOTION AT MOON TOWN. SPIN THE WHEEL AND WIN MULTIPLE PRIZES.

PEAS AND RICE; COW HEEL SOUP

PASTA WITH MINCED MEAT; BAKED CHICKEN

BAKED PORK; GRILLED MARLIN; MACARONI PIE

FRIED POT FISH; LAMB STEW

ONION GRAVY; STEAMED VEGS; SALADS

 Jamaica Gleaner

Amnesty International has given the Jamaican Government a pat on the shoulder in a report in which it provides a mixed review of the island’s state of public security.

In the report, to be released today, the international human-rights lobby continues to chastise the security forces for their handling of crime and excessive use of force. However, it commends the Bruce Golding administration for what it describes as the interest it has shown in addressing most of the threats to public security.

The country recorded its third-highest homicidal toll in history last year with 1,611 murders. It similarly recorded a high but reduced number of police fatal shootings with 224 deaths. That, however, appears to be on the increase again, with 84 people killed by the police in the first five months of the year.

Strategy for change

According to Amnesty, the Government has identified a clear strategy for change and has formulated recommendations to reform the police force and the justice system. It notes that the strategies have received interest from international donors that have committed to provide financial and technical support for the process.

“Jamaicans have shown their support for the plans by electing a government whose programme focuses on the need to curb violence and foster development,” the author of the report states.

“What remains to be seen is whether the political leadership is strong enough to overcome possible obstacles and resistance and whether it is truly committed to tackling the public-security problem from a human-rights perspective.”

Antigua Sun

The Leeward Islands Airline Pilots Association (LIALPA) is asking LIAT’s management to rectify all aircraft maintenance issues to ensure that operational standards are maintained by the airline.

“LIALPA reiterates that the focus should be on these matters rather than using the pilots as scapegoats for the ongoing numerous delays and cancellations of flights due to maintenance problems and inclement weather across the region,” a press release from the association stated.

In a recent statement issued by Acting Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Brian Challenger, he stated that the disruptions being faced by LIAT at this time arise from a distinct lack of co-operation by some pilots and an unusual increase in unscheduled maintenance.

LIALPA said that Challenger’s comments prove what they have been saying all along with regards to proper maintenance of aircraft.

“There would be no unusual increase in unscheduled maintenance of aircraft, if management had a systematic, structured and effective maintenance plan in place. The company’s devised scheduled of maximum use of the entire fleet without a spare aircraft, renders them vulnerable in the unlikely event of unexpected maintenance issues,” LIALPA added.

The pilots are very disappointed with Challenger’s “attempts to lay blame at the feet of the pilots for a lack of co-operation.”

They said management will receive no co-operation from them when it comes to the compromise of operational standards. “Despite all odds, we will continue to fight intimidation and veiled threats to fly aircraft below operational standards,” the release stated.

The association called on management of the airline to desist from its “overworked statements of apology and its decades-old appeal for passengers to be patient.”

LIALPA does not believe that there is any excuse for LIAT not to fulfill its social contract to transport the people of the Caribbean at more affordable airfares and in a safe and timely manner.

Written by Afeefah Beharry

Antigua Sun

European Commission (EC) on Saturday began examining ways for heightened political dialogue among Caribbean countries, ahead of the next EU-Latin American Caribbean (EU-LAC) summit to be held in Spain in 2010.

The EC’s Director General for Development, Stefano Manservisi called on 16 Caribbean Forum (CARIFORUM) of the African Caribbean Pacific (ACP) states to fast track their integration ahead of the summit to be held in Madrid.

“In view of the next summit, I think that we should operationalise the political dialogue at the regional level which has not been the case so far at a satisfactory level,” Manservisi said.

He was at the time addressing Caribbean finance and trade ministers at the CARIFORUM – European Commission Dialogue on Regional Co-operation and Integration. “We have to show all the political will to progress towards closer regional integration,” Manservisi added.

CARIFORUM Secretary General, Edwin Carrington, however, noted that 165 million euros that have been allocated to finance a Caribbean work-programme on a range of areas from 2008 to 2013 would be insufficient.

“We also look forward to discussing with our European partners such additional steps as we can take to help ensure that our priority needs are met, notwithstanding the limitations of the 165 million euros from the European Development Fund (EDF),” Carrington said.

Other areas of regional integration to be funded from that package includes the establishment of an OECS economic union, Caricom’s economic integration including the single market and economy, implementation of the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) between the Caribbean and Europe, training in competition policy and intellectual property, fighting crime and supporting civil society.