• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Main
 Supplement: House of Assembly Debates...
 Statutory Instrument Supplement...
 Statutory Instrument Supplement...














Group Title: Official gazette, Barbados
Title: The official gazette
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00076861/00048
 Material Information
Title: The official gazette
Physical Description: v. : ill. ; 33-42 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Barbados
Publisher: s.n.
Place of Publication: BridgetownBarbados Published by authority
 Subjects
Subject: Law -- Periodicals -- Barbados   ( lcsh )
Politics and government -- Periodicals -- Barbados   ( lcsh )
Genre: periodical   ( marcgt )
 Notes
General Note: Caption title.
General Note: Supplements issued for some of the numbers.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00076861
Volume ID: VID00048
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: aleph - 001043625
oclc - 12594829
notis - AFC6434

Table of Contents
    Main
        Page 409
        Page 410
        Page 411
        Page 412
        Page 413
        Page 414
    Supplement: House of Assembly Debates dated 12th December, 1967
        Page A-983
        Page A-984
        Page A-985
        Page A-986
        Page A-987
        Page A-988
        Page A-989
        Page A-990
        Page A-991
        Page A-992
        Page A-993
        Page A-994
        Page A-995
        Page A-996
        Page A-997
        Page A-998
        Page A-999
        Page A-1000
        Page A-1001
        Page A-1002
        Page A-1003
        Page A-1004
        Page A-1005
        Page A-1006
        Page A-1007
        Page A-1008
        Page A-1009
        Page A-1010
        Page A-1011
        Page A-1012
        Page A-1013
        Page A-1014
        Page A-1015
        Page A-1016
        Page A-1017
        Page A-1018
        Page A-1019
        Page A-1020
        Page A-1021
        Page A-1022
        Page A-1023
        Page A-1024
        Page A-1025
        Page A-1026
        Page A-1027
        Page A-1028
    Statutory Instrument Supplement No. 28; L.N. 61
        Page B-1
    Statutory Instrument Supplement No. 28; L.N. 62
        Page B-2
Full Text












VOL. cm


Ar&
JI SEP 6 W ^,[





4(3?1
W 51-t~jg


`~firtJIrt


PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY


BRIDGETOWN, BARBADOS, 16TH MAY, 1968


TABLE OF CONTENTS
Gazette Notices
Appointments: Miss 0. Trotman and Miss I. Hutchinson
to be Sisters, Mental Hospital.................... 409
In the Supreme Court: Browne vs Evelyn................. 413
Gittens vs Gittens................................... 412
Goodridge vs Anderson............................. 411
Mayers vs Atherley ................................. 413
Power vs Beckles.................................. 411
Skinner vs Burrowes................................ 412
Trotman vs Nicholls................................ 410
Notice of Sitting of Licensing AuthorityDist. "A"... 409
Datent: "Insecticidal Baits and Process for their
Production" ........................................ 411
Patent: Process for the manufacture of 1,
2-Dihydrobenzodiazepines" .................... 412
Probate Advertisement dated 10th May, 1968........... 414
Provost Marshal re land at Ashton Hall, St. Peter. 410
House of Assembly Debates dated 12th December, 1967
Legal Supplement
S.I. 1968 No. 61: Miscellaneous Controls (Control of Prices)
(Amendment) (No. 13) Order, 1968.
S.I. 1968 No. 62: Miscellaneous Controls (Control of Prices)
(Amendment) (No. 14) Order, 1968.

NOTICE NO. 356
GOVERNMENT NOTICE
Appointments
Miss O. Trotman andMiss I. Hutchinson,
nurses, to be Sisters, Mental Hospital, with
effect from 1st May, 1968.

(M.P. 529/6).


NOTICE NO. 357
Form R.


Regulation 9


Notice of Sitting of Licensing Authority


(The Liquor Licence Act, 1957 Sec. 16)



Notice is hereby given that a special
sitting of the Licensing Authority for District
"A" will be held at Magistrates' Courts,
District "A" on 30th May, 1968 at 9.00
o'clock a.m. for the purpose of GRANTING
LICENCES, TRANSFERS OF LICENCES,
AND ORDERS FOR REGISTRATION OF
CLUBS under the Above Acts.

t
Dated at Magistrates' Courts, District
"A" this 26th day of April, 1968.


G. A. COLLYMORE
Clerk to the Licensing Authority (Ag.)


N.B.


All Applications MUST reach the Mag-
istrates' Courts District "A" not later
than 21 days.


---


(I #









OFICA GAZTT Ma 1,96


NOTICE NO. 280 (second publication)


NOTICE


(Under Section 31 of the Provost Marshal's
Act 1904-6)


I hereby call upon all persons claiming
any estate, right, title, interest in or to any
lien (other than the judgement on which the
Execution has issued) on ALL that certain
piece or parcel of land containing by admeas-
urement Three Roods and Thirty Perches
situate at Ashton Hall in the Parish of Saint
Peter butting and bounding on lands of one
Thomas on the North on lands of one Mahon
one Newsam and one Robinson on the West on
lands of the Estate of J. Thomas deceased on
the South and on the East on lands of Jonathan
Corbin and an eight foot right of way which
leads to the Public Road and on lands of Cyril
Fergusson or however else the same may
abut and bound appraised to TWO HUNDRED
AND FIFTY DOLLARS ($250.00) attached
from Cynthia Mabel Corbin for and towards
satisfaction to send a statement to me in
writing on or before Thursday the 27th day of
June, 1968, after which date the above des-
cribedproperty shall be freed from any claim
not received.

Dated this 14th day of March, 1968.


L. L. DURANT
Chief Marshal (Ag.)
Coleridge Street,
Bridgetown.


NOTICE NO. 358


IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE

High Court


No. 189 of 1968

ASENATH ERMYNTRUDE TROTMAN:
Plaintiff


HUBERT STANLEY NICHOLLS et al:
Defendants



Any person having any claim, lien or
charge against the property described here-
under shall submit such claim duly authenti-
cated on oath to me on or before the 1lth day
of July 1968.

PROPERTY: ALL THAT certain piece or
parcel of land situate at Upper Green Hill in
the Parish of Saint Michael and Island of
Barbados aforesaid containing by admeas-
urement three thousand one hundred and
thirty three square feet or thereabouts be the
same more orless Abutting and Bounding on
two sides on lands of the estate of M. G. T.
Lynch deceased on lands of one Mr. Thornton
and on the Public Road called Highway No. 2
or however else the same may abut and bound.

VALUE OF PROPERTY: $2,506.40

Dated this 6th day of May 1968.

C. A. ROCHEFORD
Registrar of the Supreme Court.


-L .---- _


OFFICIAL GAZETTE


May 16, 1968









May 1, 196 OFFIIAL GZETT


NOTICE NO. 332 (third publication)


PUBLIC NOTICE

Patents Act, 1903-7, Sec. 10


NOTICE is hereby given that HAMISH
GREIG McCLURG of Lucas Street, Bridge-
town, Barbados, lodged in this Office an ap-
plication and complete specification for a
patent under the Patent Act 1903 (1903-7),
for an invention for "INSECTICIDAL BAITS
AND PROCESS FOR THEIR PRODUCTION."

The said Specification has been accepted
and is open to public inspection at this Office.


C. A. ROCHEFORD
Registrar.



NOTICE NO. 359


IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE

High Court


No. 182 of 1968


ORVILLE ARTHUR POWER:

WILFRED BECKLES:


Plaintiff

Defendant


Any person having any claim, lien or
charge against the property described here-
under shall submit such claim duly authenti-
cated on oath to me on or before the lIth day
of July 1968.

PROPERTY: ALL THATcertainpiece or
parcel of land situate at Maxwell Road, Christ
Church in this Island containing by admeas-
urement three roods one perch or there-
abouts abutting and bounding on lands of
Violet Coppin, on lands of Annie Cadogan, on


lands of George Pilgrim and on the Public
Road known as Highway No. 7 or however
else the same may abut and bound.

VALUE OF PROPERTY: $1,000.00

Dated this 6th day of May 1968.

C. A. ROCHEFORD
Registrar of the Supreme Court.


NOTICE NO. 360


IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE


High Court


No. 190 of 1968

GRETA PALMYRA GOODRIDGE: Plaintiff

MIGNON DORSEY COOKE ANDERSON:
Defendant

Any person having any claim, lien or
charge against the property described here-
under shall submit such claim duly authenti-
cated on oath to me on or before the 11th day
of July 1968.

PROPERTY: ALL THAT certain piece or
parcel of land situate at St. Helens in the
Parish of Saint George in the Island of Bar-
bados aforesaid containing by admeasure-
ment two acres or thereabouts abutting and
bounding on lands now or late of Nathaniel
Burke on lands of Moonshine Plantation on
lands now or late of E. D. Powlett and on the
Public Road or however else the same may
abut and bound.

VALUE OF PROPERTY: $10,000.00

Dated this 6th day of May 1968.

C. A. ROCHEFORD
Registrar of the Supreme Court.


May 16, -1968


OFFICIAL GAZETTE








OFIIL AETEsa 1,16


NOTICE NO. 361

PUBLIC NOTICE

Patents Act, 1903-7, Sec. 10


NOTICE is hereby given that F. HOFF-
MANN-LA ROCHE & CO. AKTIENGESELL-
SCHAFT, a Swiss company, chemical
manufacturers, of 124-184 Grenzacher-
strasse, Basle, Switzerland, lodged in this
Office an application and complete specifica-
tion for a patent under the Patent Act 1903
(1903-7), for an invention for "PROCESS
FOR THE MANUFACTURE OF 1, 2-DIHY-
DROBENZODIAZEPINES."

The said Specification has been accepted
and is open to public inspection at this Office.


C. A. ROCHEFORD,
Registrar.

NOTICE NO. 362

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE


High Court


No. 183 of 1968

ST.ALBAN O'BRIAN SKINNER: Plaintiff

LLOYD ALFONSO BURROWES per Atty:
Defendant

Any person having any claim, lien or
charge against the property described here-
under shall submit such claim duly authenti-
cated on oath to me on or before the 11th day
of July 1968.

PROPERTY: ALL THATcertainpiece or
parcel of land situate in the parish of Saint
Joseph and Island aforesaid containing by
admeasurement 17 Perches or thereabouts
ABUTTING AND BOUNDING on lands now or
late of William Dyall, on lands now or late of


William Wharton, on lands now or late of
Nicholas Allman on other lands now or late
of Nicholas Allman and on lands now or late
of Ethel Hoyte or however else the same may
abut and bound.
VALUE OF PROPERTY: $500.00

Dated this 6th day of May 1968.


C. A. ROCHEFORD
Registrar of the Supreme Court.

NOTICE NO. 363

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE


High Court


No. 192 of 1968


HILDA DOREEN GITTENS:


Plaintiff


MIGNON GITTENS: Defendant
Any person having any claim, lien or
charge against the property described here-
under shall submit such claim duly authenti-
cated on oath to me on or before the 11th day
of July 1968.

PROPERTY: ALL THAT certain piece or
parcel of land situate at Robinsons Land,
Near Ruby in the parish of Saint Philip and
Island of Barbados containing by admeasure-
ment two roods five and one-half perches or
thereabouts (in which area is included 4 1/2
perches in roadway) abutting and bounding on
lands of the estate of David Lorde on two
sides, on Blanche Trotman, and on the Pub-
lic Road or however else the same may abut
and bound with the appurtenances.

VALUE OF PROPERTY: $1,000.00

Dated this 6th day of May 1968.

C. A. ROCHEFORD
Registrar of the Supreme Court.


May 16, .1968


OFFICIAL GAZETTE










day 11968 OFFICIAL GAZETTE


NOTE NO. 364


IN HE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE

High Court

No. 94 of 1968


KE4NETH CLIFFORD BROWNE: Plaintiff


HUIERT LEYLAND EVELYN: Defendant


\ny person having any claim, lien or
change against the property described here-
under shall submit such claim duly authenti-
catel on oath to me on or before the 11th day
of Jily 1968.

PROPERTY: ALL THAT certain piece or
parcel of land (formerly part of the Market
Hill Plantation) situate in the said parish of
Saint George and Island aforesaid containing
by admeasurement Two twenty five and nine
tenths perches be the same more or less
butting and bounding on two sides on other
lands of the said Market Hill Plantation on
lands now or late of one Roach deceased and
on the Public Road or however else the same
may 'butt and bound together with the
dwellinghouse thereon and all and singular
other the buildings and erections on the said
parcel of land was granted by the Defendant
to the Plaintiff.

VALUE OF PROPERTY: $24,000.00

Dated this 6th day of May 1968.

C. A. ROCHEFORD
Registrar of the Supreme Court.


NOTICE NO. 365


IN THE SUPREME COURT OF JUDICATURE

High Court

No. 191 of 1968


LEONARD ARCHIBALD MAYERS: Plaintiff


CLIFTON EDRICK ATHERLEY: Defendant


Any person having any claim, lien or
charge against the property described here-
under shall submit such claim duly authenti-
cated on oath to me on or before the 11th day
of July 1968.

PROPERTY: ALL THAT certain piece or
parcel of land (formerly part of the lands of
Welchman Hall Plantation) situate at Welch-
man Hall in the Parish of Saint Thomas in
the Island of Barbados aforesaid containing
by admeasurement Twenty three and one half
perches or thereabouts inclusive of one perch
in the area of the Public Road) Abutting and
Bounding towards the North on lands now or
late of F. Lovell towards the East on the
Public Road towards the South on lands now
or late of John Johnson and towards the West
on another Public Road or however else the
same may abut and bound.


VALUE OF PROPERTY: $1,650.00

Dated this 6th day of May 1968.


C. A. ROCHEFORD
Registrar of the Supreme Court.


OFFICIAL GAZETTE


May 1 1968











PROBATE ADVERTISEMENT

PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that applications have been mad
for the following Grants of Probate and Administration namely



PROBATE of the Will dated the 7th day of March, 1966 of ELVIRA JANE TAITT, lat of
Hindsbury Road, in the parish of Saint Michael in this Island, who died on the 6th
day of February, 1968, by ELOISE ELAINE SORIANA, the sole Executrix named in
the Will of the said deceased.

PROBATE of the Will dated the 9th day of May, 1963 of EUSTACE SEYMOUR GIBBS ate
of Rockley New Road in the parish of Christ Church in this Island who died onthe
18th day of November, 1967, by MARJORIE AGNES GIBBS the Executrix name in
the Will of the said deceased.

PROBATE of the Will dated the 23rd day of March, 1964 of KETURAH AUGUSTA JANE
ROSE also called or known as LOUISA GERTRUDE ROSE late of Marchfield inthe
parish of Saint Philip in this Island who died on the 30th day of March, 1966, by
GEORGE THEOPHILUS MILLER, the sole Executor named in the Will of the said
deceased.

PROBATE of the Will dated the 14th day of July, 1967 of GABRIEL AGUSTINE LAYNE
late of Pilgrim Place in the parish of Christ Church in this Island who died on the
25th day of October, 1967, by JAMES ALONZA CONLIFFE-LAYNE, the sole
Executor named in the Will of the said deceased.

LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION to the Estate of LAWRENCE ALONZO LINTON, late of
Carrington Village in the parish of Saint Michael in this Island who died on the 23rd
day of October, 1967, by DORIS LAVINIA HOPE, daughter of the said deceased.

LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION to the Estate of STANLEY CHRISTOPHER COX late of
Corner Baxter's and Passage Roads in the parish of Saint Michael in this Island
who died on the 3rd day of November, 1967, by RITA MARJORIE COX, widow of
the said deceased.

UNLESS CAVEAT is lodged withinfourteen days from the date of this Advertisement
with the Registrar of the Supreme Court through whom the abovenamed applications have
been made, Probate and Administration will be granted accordingly.


Dated this loth day of May, 1968.

C. A. ROCHEFORD
Registrar.


Government Printing Office


OFFICIAL GAZETTE


aal16, 1968











THE





House of Assembly Debates




(OFFICIAL REPORT)


SECOND SESSION OF 1966 71


HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY

Tuesday, 12th December, 1967

Pursuant to the adjournment, the House of As-
sembly met at 12.15 p.m. o'clock today.

PRESENT

His Honour J. E. T. BRANCKER, Q.C., F.Z.S.,
(Speaker); Mr. E. ST.A. HOLDER, J.P.;Hon. C. E. TALMA,
(Minister of Health and Community Development); Mr. J. W.
CORBIN; Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON, (Minister of Trade,
Tourism, Co.operatives and Fisheries); Mr. R. ST.C.
WEEKES, J.P.; Hon. N. W. BOXILL, (Minister of Com-
munications and Works); Mr. J. B. YEARWOOD, (Chairman
of Committees); Mr. C. A. E. HOPPIN, J.P.

Prayers were read.

Hon. E. W. BARROW, Hon. A. DaC.EDWARDS,Messrs.
SMITH, ST. JOHN, J. M. G. M. ADAMS and LOWE entered
the House and took their seats.
MINUTES

Mr. SPEAKER: The Minutes of the meetings of
Thursday 7th, Friday 17th and Tuesday 21stNovem-
ber, I am informed, have been duly circulated. Unless
there is any objection to any of these Minutes, I will
declare them to be confirmed. There being no ob-
jection in respect of the confirmation of the Minutes
of any of these three dates, I now declare each of
these Minutes duly confirmed.

GOVERNMENT NOTICES

Hon. E. W. BARROW: Mr. Speaker, I beg to ask
leave of the House to give notice of certain matters at
a later stage, pending the arrival of the necessary
documents. There are two or three matters which
I shall be asking leave of the House to deal with in all
stages today, particularly relating to expenditure for
the parish of St. Joseph, and the Shops Act to allow an
extension of working time during the Christmas sea-
son. I am sure the hon. member for St. Joseph, who
is in his place, will not object to leave being granted.

Mr. SPEAKER: I have noted what the Hon. and
Learned Prime Minister has said.


QUESTIONS

Mr. SPEAKER: There are certainly no Ques-
tions in the name of any hon. member whom I pres-
ently observe to be in his seat.

Order No. 1 stands in the name of the Hon.
Leader of the House: To move the House into Com-
mittee of Supply to consider the grants of sums of
money for the service of the Island.

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

Hon. E. W. BARROW: Mr. Speaker, before we
enter into the matters for discussion on the Order
Paper, I would beg to move, after consultation with
the members on the other side of the House, that the
Standing Orders Nos. 5, 14, 16, 18, 19, 40 and 45 be
suspended for the remainder of this day's sitting.

Hon. C. E. TALMA: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.

GOVERNMENT BUSINESS

Hon. E. W. BARROW: Mr. Speaker, Ibegto move
that Government Business be now taken.

Hon. C. E. TALMA: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.

Mr. SPEAKER: Under Government Business,
Order No. 1 stands in the name of the Hon. Leader of
the House who, I am informed, is indisposed today.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: Mr. Speaker, I beg to ask
leave to deal with the Item No. 1 on the Order Paper
which stands in the name of the hon. junior member
for St. Lucy, due to the fact that the hon. member is
not in his place and is indisposed.

Mr. SPEAKER: The Hon. and Learned Prime
Minister is seeking leave of the House to take charge
of Item No. 1, which stands in the name of the Hon.
Leader of the House, and, unless there is any ob-
jection, he will be granted such leave. There being no











objection, leave is granted to the Hon. and Learned
Prime Minister to move the House into Committee
of Supply to consider the grant of sums of money for
the service of the Island.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: Mr. Speaker, Ibegto move
that Your Honour do now leave the Chair and the
House go into Committee of Supply.

Hon. C. E. TALMA: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative,
without division. Mr. SPEAKER left the Chair and the
House went into Committee of Supply, Mr. YEARWOOD in
the Chair.
12.25 p.m.

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES 1967-69 No.31

A Resolution for the sum of $9,600 was called.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: Mr. Chairman, this Reso-
lution is a fairly simple one, and it is for a total sum
of $9,600. Under Part I. Head 14 Item 31, of the
Current Estimates, the sum of $600 is needed to
provide for furniture in the Department of Inland
Revenue as a result of the increase in staff au-
thorised by the Civil Establishment General (Amend-
ment) No. 9 Order, 1967. Hon. members will be aware
that this Resolution for the increase in staff was
passed some time ago, but we could not take ad-
vantage of the Order increasing the staff of the De-
partment of Inland Revenue because there was no
physical space available until the Department moved
into the new Financial Building. They have now moved
and, as a result, we have been able to appoint the
necessary staff in order to allow the Department to
carry out its functions in an efficient manner. We
therefore need $600 to provide for the additional
furniture and equipment for the staff which was
authorised by the House under the Civil Establish-
ment Order No. 9 of 1967.

The other amount in this Resolution which is
engaging the attention of the Committee at this time
is for the sum of $9,000. This is to meet the ad-
ditional cost of medical treatment overseas of pa-
tients of the Queen Elizabeth Hospital whose
condition required medical expertise and facilities
which are not available locally. Ten cases have been
sent overseas during the current financial year, and in
view of the fact that one of the cases had to be sent to
London and another to New York, the expenses were
higher than had been anticipated. I do not think that
there is anything controversial about either of these
two items and I beg to move that Head 14 stand part
of the Schedule.

Hon. C. E. TALMA: I beg to second that.
The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.

HEAD 43 MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Head 43 Ministry of Health and Community Develop-
ment was called.


Hon. E. W. BARROW: Mr. Chairman, I beg to
move that Head 43 stand part of the Schedule.

Hon. C. E. TALMA: I beg to second that.
The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: I beg tomove,Mr. Chair-
man, that a Resolution for a sum of $9,600 do now
pass.

Hon. C. E. TALMA: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: Mr. Chairman, I beg to
move that you do now report progress and ask for
leave for the Committee to sit again.

Hon. C. E. TALMA: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.

The CHAIRMAN reported and Mr, SPEAKER resumed
the Chair and reported accordingly.

Mr. SPEAKER: The next Order of the Day stands
in the name of the Hon. and Learned Prime Minister,
and it is to resume debate on the second reading of a
Bill to amend the Rate of Interest Act, 1754. When
discussion was adjourned it was on the motionof the
hon. and learned senior member for St. Thomas and
that hon. member now has, if he is so disposed, the
right to continue his speech.

Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker,......

Hon. E. W. BARROW: Mr. Speaker, I think that
on the House resuming, the Chairman reported pro-
gress and the passing of a Resolution in Committee.
I think that in normal circumstances, we would pro-
ceed to deal with that Resolution, and then the Gov-
ernment would be allowed to give the Notices which
we intended to give and of which we gave intimation
at an earlier stage.
12.35 p.m.

Mr. SPEAKER: Actually, the Chairman reported
only progress to me and asked leave to sit again. Th t
is my report.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: The Chairman was re-
quested to report the passing of this Resolution. I
think that was the understanding of the House.

Mr. SPEAKER: I would accept thatthe Chairman
reported the passing of one Resolution in Committee.


Hon. E. W. BARROW: Mr. Speaker, I beg to
move that the Resolution for the sum of $9,600 be
now read a first time.


Hon. C. E. TALMA: I beg to second that.











The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.


Hon. E. W. BARROW: I beg to move that this
Resolution be now read a second time.

Hon. C. E. TALMA: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.


Hon. E. W. BARROW: I beg to move that this
Resolution be now agreed to.

Hon. C. E. TALMA: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.

RATE OF INTEREST BILL 1967

Mr. SPEAKER: The next Order of the day Or-
der No. 2 stands in the name of the Hon. Prime
Minister.

When the House was previously adjourned the
hon. senior member for St. Thomas was speaking
on the second reading of the Bill to amend the Rate of
Interest Act, 1754.

Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: On the last occasion,
Mr. Speaker, when the House met, in my speech on
this Bill in reply to the Prime Minister, I tried to
show the House that it was an error to believe that the
matter of rate of interest was as simple as the Prime
Minister put it. If I may quote from the note I took,
the Prime Minister said that the interest rates go up
to one-half of one per cent above the Bank Rate. That
is the note which I took at the time, and hon. members
may recall that I went through the current rates pre-
vailing in England and none of them was in fact one -
half of one per cent above the Bank rate.

For example, British Treasury paper, Con-
solidated Stock had been marked down so that the
real rate of interest is 7 1/2 per cent.Bank deposit
rates are only sixpercent; mortgage interest rates
in England have not been marked up, they remain at
7 1/8 percent; Local authority loan borrowing rate
is 7 7/8 per cent and there are in fact no rates which,
as the Prime Minister said, had gone up one-half
of one percent more than the Bank Rate.


Now, Mr. Speaker, quoting and citing different
rates of interest as I did, it does not give you the
whole picture of the inaccurate premises on which
this present Bill is based. If we take exactly what
the Prime Minister said, that there was some cor-
relation between the rate of interest and the Bank
rate, that the Bank rate is eight percent, and that
there is something in England that you can call the
rate of interest that goes up to 8 1/2 percent,we an
this side could not quarrel with the banks.


If it is so, why shouldwe lend money out in Bar-
bados at 8 per cent? But,you may recall, Mr. Speaker,
I also pointed out that the Bank of England had issued
a directive to all English banks and restricted the
volume of their lending to exactly the same as it was
before the Bank rate went up, except that they may
loan to Overseas and exporters at the special fixed
rate of 5 1/2 per cent.

If a businessman in England is dealing with an
overseas country, far from having to pay anything like
the Bank rate, he would not even have to pay what a
businessman here has to pay. He is inthe position to
borrow money at the fixed Bank of England rate of
5 1/2 per cent. That is going on despite the rise in
the Bank rate itself.

Your attention now, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. SPEAKER: I have heard every word that the
hon. member said until he stopped speaking.

Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: I am absolutely sure
that you heard every word that the Prime Minister
said until he stopped speaking. Your Honour will be
well advised not to listen.

Mr. SPEAKER: That is a facility and aptitude
which matured lawyers possess.

Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: I am not quite sure
what facility Your Honour is referring to, but I shall
not pursue the matter further.

As I was saying, Your Honour, there is no Bank
rate of any 8 1/2 percent available to any bank in
Barbados which will cause the reduction in the rate
available to Barbadians here. Now, Mr. Speaker, let
us consider the situation here. Suppose you have
$10,000 which you wish to invest and you want to take
advantage of what has been described in the heat of
panic as this 8 percent rise in the Bank rate.
There is no way, Mr. Speaker, exceptwhere you
can go here and lend $10,000 out through a solicitor
at 8 per cent. There is no doubt about that. There are
persons every day seeking a mortgage for one thing
or another. But the mortgage rate in England for
Building Societies is only 7 1/8 per cent. We have no
Building Society system in Barbados; therefore, it
only affects solicitors who can sell interest rates;
but in England a Building Society mortgage interest
rate is the prevailing rate.
12.45 p.m.

You will not go and borrow money at 8 per cent
when you can go to a Building Society and borrow it
at 7 1/8% The only immediately available source for
a straightforward capitalist investment for money
in England is in fact Treasury paper, 7 per cent,and
you can buy Treasury paper here in Barbados around
7 per cent or put it on to the Bank at fixed interest
rates, on which, if you are prepared to leave it for a
year, you can now get 6 per cent in England.

This is a panic absolutely without foundation.
Just consider the circumstances in which it came











to the House. One Saturday afternoon, according to
the Prime Minister, the Right Honourable James
Callaghan told him he was raising the Bank rate. I
do not know why Mr. Callaghan would have chosen our
Prime Minister to impart this information to him
personally. I do not know what exactly Barbados has
that makes it essential for a personal notification of
a rise in the English Bank rate to be given us. It is
very flattering, Mr. Speaker. I only hope we could do
as well with the British Treasury if we ever wanted
a Development .loan. But that may be as it is. I be-
lieve personally that the Prime Minister was told by
officials in the Ministry of Finance shortly after the
announcement came over the B.B.C. That is just
perhaps my mistaken belief; but the fact is that he
knew on Saturday afternoon, and on the Monday this
Bill was evidently being prepared. The model they
had to use, as the Prime Minister himself admitted,
was a Bill which was prepared and passed by the
Barbados Labour Party Government in 1958. They
had to use that model, but an emendation was made
under that model through which only overseas per-
sons could lend money at more than the then rate of
6%.

Under the present Bill which is before the House,
all banks can lend it, as well as those firms whom
the Minister of Finance may approve of and may
license to lend money at more than the. 8 per cent rate
of interest available to other persons and institutions.
And in passing, Mr. Speaker, I think Ican safely say
that both parties in the Opposition regard that as an
extremely tendentious and dangerous provision. In
the Minister of Finance's own interest, he shouldn't
be in a positionto pick and choose between people and
to give people the power to lend money at 10%, 15%,
20% or 30% where traditional moneylending sources
can only do so at 8 per cent. It is in the Minister of
Finance's own interest not to put himself in a position
where people can ever say that he has licensed a
money-lender for political or other favour; but there
it is, Mr. Speaker, in the Bill.

Now we were told that this was urgent. Mr.
Speaker, who could believe, if the Minister of Fi-
nance really wanted a Bill passed, that half an hour
of a speech on a motion that the Bill be the next item
on the Order Paper, would convince the Minister of
Finance that the House should be adjourned, not for
one or two days, but for two weeks? If this was an
urgent Bill as was suggested, the Minister of Fi-
nance would have adjourned the House until the next
day at 9 o'clock or 10 o'clockinthe morning, as was
once done, or the Thursday or the Friday whichever
day suited him. The adjournment for two weeks is
proof of the lack of urgency, and once you do accept
the lack of urgency, we have to look with some mis-
giving at the cogency of any of the Prime Minister's
arguments in respect of this Bill. Of course, Mr.
Speaker, no matter how fine a lawyer a man may be -
and I must not be taken by that, Mr. Speaker, to be
touting for business for the Prime Ministerwhen in a
few years he returns to James Street but no matter
how much of a lawyer a manmaybe, when he is put-
ting up a really bad case, a case he does not believe
in, he is bound to put it up with a little less fervour


9.


than something which he accepts, and the Prime
Minister is hobbled in this matter.

Indeed this whole issue of the rate of interest
shows a rare reversal of form. Reference was made
in the Prime Minister's speech to the events of 1958.
Mr. Speaker, we can uncover those events a little
further. The Prime Minister pressed hard on the
point that the rate of interest was then raised to ac-
commodate one firm, the Barbados Light and Power
Company. My understanding is that Mr. K. R. Hunte,
always the friend of a Government in power any
Government and always a behind-the -scenes opera-
tor and manipulator, pressed the former Minister of
Finance, the hon. junior member for St. Joseph, for
some time not one or two months, but for a long
period to raise the rate of interest in Barbados,
and the hon. junior member for St. Joseph resisted.
He would not do it. Came the Federal elections, the
hon. junior member for St. Joseph was translated to
a higher chair, a new Minister of Finance took office,
and shortly after that apparently the new Ministerof
Finance did not have the experience, perhaps, either
of Mr. Hunte or of the subject he was dealing with, and
the 1958 Bill came to be passed. It is true that the
circumstances were then similar to the circum-
stances prevailing today, in that there were occasions
during the discussion on that Bill when the Bank rate
in England was higher than the 6 per cent maximum
interest rate permitted in Barbados; but the interest-
ing thing then, Mr. Speaker, was that the present
Prime Minister, then the hon. junior member for St.
John, as he himself has said, took twenty pages in the
Official Gazette to contain his arguments againstthe
Bill, which he has described himself as being prac-
tically identical with the one before the House today.
I once heard the Prime Minister say that one day he
will write a book about the hon. junior member for
St. Joseph which will consist of nothing but quotations
from the hon. junior member for St. Joseph himself.
Well, if anybody thinks it worthwhile for such a
relatively slight subject to be written, when a biog-
rapher writes on the Prime Minister, these are the
identical details which the biographer will perforce
be impelled to put in. In 1958 there were twenty pages
against the Bill; in 1967, not quite so long, but the
same arguments in favour of it. When you accuse a
man of that type of inconsistency, you are accusing
him of one of the political sins that I think we would
all do well to avoid. The Prime Minister says some
very remarkable things from time to time, Mr.
Speaker. It is not difficult to contradict what he says.
It is not difficult to ridicule what he says.
12.55 p.m.
He is proving to us now that it is not difficult to
ridicule and contradict what he says. To quote an ex-
ample, the Prime Minister made a speech and said
that he had visited the house of the senior member
for St. Joseph on one occasion and found a pig tied to
the table. That could be contradicted by persons who
know that he had never made that visit at all, and
there was no pig or whatever the situation is......

Mr. SPEAKER: This does not arise in connection
with the rate of interest. Let us proceedto deal with
the matter before the House.











Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: But on this occasion
we do not need to say that he has never come to my
house, or he has never lent me $50 to get called to
the Bar and so on. Itdoes nothave to be contradicted
out of the mouths of other persons. In this case the
arguments can be contradicted out of his own mouth.
All we have to do is to refer to the debates. He has
referred us to them; let him go back and read them.

The situation, Mr. Speaker, is the same. A rise
in the Bank rate of England; pressure because the
banks here are always putting pressure on people;
and persons with money to lend like Mr. Hunte, who
has his businesses and has a lot of money from time
to time looking for somewhere to invest it, naturally
wants a high rate of interest, and pressure,of course,
comes from people with money. In our peculiar cir-
cumstances, it is the duty of the Ministerof Finance
in Barbados, in the light of our peculiar circum-
stances, not to give in to that pressure too easily. It
is our view that the Prime Minister is giving in to the
pressure too easily on this occasion.

Now, Mr. Speaker, there are one or two errors
of fact which, I think, should be corrected. The move -
ments of the rate of interest during the last three
years of the Barbados Labour Party's Government
were not precisely as the Prime Minister set them
out to the House. The Rate of Interest (Amendment)
Act, 1958-26 is not precisely the same as the Bill
which has come before the House today. In those days
the rate of interest was 6%, of course. But that apart,
the two Acts differ in that the power to lend at a
higher rate than 6% in 1958 was limited to any in-
dividual resident or domiciled elsewhere thanwithin
this Island. Banks resident here could no more lend,
Mr. Speaker, than Solicitors resident here, and the
provision that any firm registered or body corporate
incorporated elsewhere than within this Island which
was contained in the Act of 1958 is qualified by this
Bill by the words "as the Minister responsible for
Finance may by Order specify." The words which,
Mr. Speaker, we findexceptionally offensive, andwill
be dealing with in Committee.

Mr. Speaker, the Act of 1958 is not by any means
precisely the same as the Act at present before the
House. I do not want to labour the point unnecessarily
but I think that it really must be obvious that the Min-
ister of Finance should not be given that sort of
power. That is a licence to print money, as Mr. Cecil
King said of his television franchise when it was
granted. As far as he was concerned, when he was
awarded the franchise for the Television Station, he
was given a licence to print money. To give a man
power to lend out money at a higher interest rate
is to do this do not forget, Mr. Speaker it is to
give him power to go to a Solicitor, borrow money at
8% and lend it out at 10%. That is what you give him
the power to do; that is what you are licensing a
man to do to use somebody else's money, by virtue
of the Minister of Finance's 'say-so' to make money
for himself.


Imagine a firm with some type of security which
it can go and offer; it offers the security; it borrows


$100,000 at 8% and then it finds other borrowers who
are not in that fortunate position it might even find
the Government, who knows? It will proceed to lend
out somebody else's money at a rate of interest
higher than it borrowed it. That is what we have to
look at.

Mr. Speaker, the next Act that amended the rate
of interest was the Act of 1959-1 which, in fact, was
passed in February 1959 and was deemed to come
into force on the 25th August, 1958, the same day as
the other Act. That Act was amended only very
slightly by adding words to widen the ambit of the
Act and to bring it more into line with the original
Act which it was seeking to amend.

Now, Mr. Speaker, we come to the third of the
amending Acts. After listening to the Prime Minis-
ter, I must confess that, despite my experience not
as long as your experience or the experience of the
hon. senior member for St. Joseph; not as long as
yours or his, but, nevertheless, long enough to be-
come aware that there are many statements which
the Prime Minister makes which you have to take with
a grain of salt nonetheless, as I listened to him, I
honestly believed him. Mr. Speaker, I believed that it
was the Democratic Labour Party Iallowedmyself
to form the impression, from what he said, that it was
the Democratic Labour Party that had reversed the
Act of 1958. I was surprisedwhen searchingthe Acts
of 1962, to which we had been referred, not to find
any enactment amending the Rate of Interest Act.

True enough, Mr. Speaker, when we check back
we find that it was the Barbados Labour Party re-
gime itself which reversed the Rate of Interest Act,
because it was passed, according to the copy which I
have here it received the assent of His Excellency
the Governor on the 2nd November, 1961.I stand to be
corrected, Mr. Speaker, but I believe that that was
before the prorogation of this Hon. House, and that
was the Act which repealed the 1958 Act, but imposed
a new limit of 8% instead of 6%. Well so mach, Mr.
Speaker, for the legislation.

Now for the context within which this legislation
is proposed. All Bank rates in Britain of 7% and up-
wards are regarded as crisis rates. They are not
imposed merely to raise the rate of interest; they
are imposed for the purpose of putting deflationary
controls on the British economy. When the economy
gets over-heated; when there is over-full employ-
ment; when there are a million jobs beingadvertised
and only 250,000 people out of work; when imports
are rising; when there is pressure on the British
economy, and when there is pressure on the pound,
you put on a crisis rate of interestof 7% or upwards
in order to reduce this.
One of the avowed reasons of raising the Bank
rate to 7% last year in Britain was to create unem-
ployment, not to attract money into Britain. It was to
create unemployment.
1.05 p.m.

I do not want to create unemployment in the
Chair. I will give Your Honour every opportunity to
hearken to the words of the Prime Minister.










Mr. SPEAKER: Dual employment is second
nature to me.

Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: I can only admire the
all-round facility of Your Honour. However, Sir, no
British Government wishes to create unemployment
or inflationary conditions for ever, and these price
rates do not stay on in Bridgetown for any length of
time. In fact, financial writers were expecting that the
eight per cent Bank rate might be removed, if not
before Christmas day, by the first Thursday in the
first trading week of next year, whatever that date
is. In other words, it is likely to go on for only a very
short period of time. I am sure that my sources of
information are no better than the Prime Minister's.
I am sure that in exactly the same way that I can read
that this rate of interest is not expected to prevail
for any length of time, the Prime Minister can read,
and if it is not read, he willbe advised by his Econo-
mic Adviser that the eight per cent bank rate is not a
measure on which to base any lasting legislation in
Barbados, because it is likely to be there only mo-
mentarily, for a month or six weeks, if as long as
six weeks. What I am suggesting is that we have got
along very well so far without this Bill. Despite the
urgency, three weeks have now passed and we have
not heard any bank crying out or any outcries on
that side of the House. The period now coming up
before us is the Christmas period, and Ido not ima-
gine a great deal of financial business ofthis sort is
going to be done. In any case, we will then have a
holiday week and then we will be in January.

What I am suggesting is that rather than do what
the Prime Minister has suggested, that is, to pass
this Bill and repeal it in afewmonths' time rather
than that, let us give it another breathing space. At
the time of greatest urgency, the Prime Minister did
not consider that a breathing space of two weeks
would do the economy of Barbados any harm; well,
let us give it a breathing space now until our first
meeting in January 1968. Let us give ita little more
time because I feel that if we do that, we will be help-
ing the Prime Minister too. I believe that he intro-
duced this Bill in deference to his advisers, that the
panic was on and that this Bill came through the pipe-
line and that the Prime Minister swallowed his own
views, swallowed his previous arguments,swallowed
his financial principles and permitted this Bill to
come before the House. Well, letus give him a chance
to tell his advisers. "I told you so." Let us give the
Bank rate an opportunity to come down in England,
and then we will see how unnecessary it was for this
Bill ever to come before the House.

Mr. Speaker, we have to look very carefully at
these promises of repeal. It is known that there is
a great volume of legislation waiting to be passed in
this Session. It is known that there is going to be the
reform of the criminal law. The Jurors Bill is going
to be introduced to provide for majority verdicts and
women sitting as jurors, and there are other impor-
tant measures which are waiting to come before the
House, but they have not got here yet. We have been
hearing about measures months ago, but they have not
yet appeared. What chance will the repeal of a Bill


like this have in the clue? Look at the damage which
can be done by putting this Bill into effect! Think of
the mortgages which might be granted at 10%, and,
of course, it is nonsense to say, as the Prime Minis-
ter said, that mortgages will not be affected. The
Prime Minister may not be aware of the fact that
banks lend money on land, and in the case of one
English Bank they lent that money in the form of an
operating account secured by a deposit on title deeds.
A firm has an overdraft and interest is charged, and
indeed it is compounded. I have known of instances
in which it has been compounded in such a way as to
affect even the rate of 1754. What will happen, Mr.
Speaker, is that they will not even needto call in the
owner of the property. All they will do, if it is in the
form of an overdraft a running operation account -
banking practice will permit them to charge whatever
the overdraft is. That is the meaningof an overdraft,
in fact, and banking practice will permit them, the
minute this Bill is passed, to decide that the over-
draft rate is 12% and they will charge twelve percent.
That is one of the dangers here. It is nonsense to say,
in my submission, that mortgages arenot goingto be
affected. There is another note I have here of what
the Prime Minister said. If overseas investors in-
tended sending money to Barbados to take advantage
of the 8% rate when the Bank of England rate is 5%
or 6%, even now, in the United States, what corre-
sponds to the Bank rate, in the Federal Reserve
Banks, the re-discount rate is still only five and a
half percent. That is, the United States Bank rate to-
day is 5 1/2% and in Canada it is 5 1/2%. If the
overseas investors are not flocking into Barbados
from the United States when they have a bank rate
of 2 1/2% below our rate of interest, what makes us
say that we are going to get overseas investors flock-
ing here by taking the limit off the rate of interest?
This is a pressurable Bill and it is regrettable that it
should have convinced the Prime Minister. It is very
regrettable in the circumstances, and I urge upon the
Prime Minister and Minister of Finance to give this
Bill some more time still. In view of the time when
he said that it was vitally urgent, he should be able to
give it more time, now that it has been recognized,
proved, shown and demonstrated that it is not so
vitally urgent. There is no question of face or pres-
tige in this; the Prime Minister has backed down
already and he can back down again. We will all be
with him. After all, we will be the people who will be
waiting to take advantage of any backing down, so that
if we actually propose the backing down, as we did on
the first occasion, so much more can the Prime
Minister accept it now, because if we are a respon-
sible Opposition, we will not be in a position to throw
it at him on some future occasion.

Mr. Speaker, subject to the factthat Ipropose to
move an amendment in Committee, that is what I have
to urge on hon. members in respect of this Bill.

Mr. St. JOHN: Mr. Speaker, I do not intend on this
occasion to detain the House for as long a period as
the other hon. members who have spoken on this Bill;
but it would appear to me that there could be only
two reasons why this Bill is necessary. Firstly,
either we in Barbados today are not attracting the











- capital which we attracted in the past because of the
state of our Rate of Interest Act, or money in Bar-
bados which hitherto was invested in one form or an-
other is now leaving Barbados to be sent abroad to
receive higher interest rates than are prevailing
here.
1.15 p.m..

Now, Sir, I did not have the privilege of hearing
the Hon. Minister of Finance when this Bill was in-
troduced, but I heard him on the last occasion when
this matter engaged the attention of the House. Nothing
that was said then has convinced me that either of the
two situations existed.

Now, some people have been saying that if we do
not amend our rate of interest now that the Bank
rate in England is 8 percent, it would mean that the
banks would cease to continue to lend in Barbados
as they have been in the past. One of the most re-
markable things I find about the banks in this country
is that when the Bank rate in England is five percent
or six percent, they do not cut down their lending
rates to the ordinary borrowers to one-half of one
percent or one percent above the Bank rate, but when
it goes to 8 percent, they say that they cannot exist;
they must lend above the Bank rate, and the Bank rate
is 8 percent; therefore, they are operating at a loss.
It seems to me, Sir, that they would like to have their
cake and eat it too.

I would be glad if the Prime Minister can tell
this House of any occasion that he knows of pre-
viously that when the Bank rate was as low as 5 1/2%7
the banks in Barbados did not continue with the or-
dinary overdrafts, with the reasonable amounts, to
lend at 8 percent.

Secondly, Sir, it must not be forgotten that inas -
much as the rate of interest on the Statute Books in
this Island is 8 per cent, there is one bank in par-
ticular in Barbados that breaks it every day under
its Personal Loan scheme. They charge somewhere
in the vicinity of 12 to 13 percent interest. There is
one bank in Barbados that breaks the Rate of Interest
Act regularly lending money to finance your loans
and things of that kind.

Another point which we have to take into con-
sideration is that one would think that the banks in
Barbados have to look for a major proportion of the
money that they lend to Barbadians from abroad,
but what is the statistics? According to the statis-
tics as contained in the Economic Survey produced
by the Ministry of Finance in this country, the total
deposit by Barbadians or the depositors in Barba-
dian banks is more than the amount of loans and ad-
vances made by the commercial banks in the country
of Barbados.

Something drastic must have happened lately.
Either a general fundamental change has takenplace
since these statistics set out in the Economic Survey
were taken, and the Prime Minister would have this
information at his disposal because in the Bank Act
certain terms are made. I doubt that the banks in Bar-


__P


bados lent out more money than they have on deposit
from the Barbadians in Barbados deposits of all
varieties.

It is not going to affect hire-purchase financing
in this Country because these Discount Houses and the
rest of them lend now under the guise of hire-
purchase schemes at interest rates far in excess of
8 percent. In so far as the mortgage rate is con-
cerned, the Prime Minister himself said that this Bill
is not going to affect mortgages. Well, the hon. senior
member for St. Thomas pointed out that under the
terms of this Bill and a bank is approved in so far
as lending by deposit of title deeds, there is nothing
in this Bill to prevent them from lendingat a greater
rate than 8 percent.

Therefore, what is the position that we have in
this country? People who invest via Solicitors' of-
fices in this country will be restricted and tied to 8
percent interest for mortgages, but the banks who
must be making money in this country look at the
palatial quarters that they have been able to build not
only here but all over the world Look at that and you
will see that they are not operating here for sport!
- they are going to be given greater privileges than
the other investors in this country because it may be
theoretically possible for the Government to approve
under the second proviso in the Bill any such firms
or institutions as the Minister may think fit. It may
be possible that some of the money invested through
Solicitors' offices by way of mortgages may be ap-
proved. It cannot be approved by the Solicitors. So-
licitors as such cannot be approved because they are
not firms; they cannot do the lending of the money
themselves. It is not their money that they are lend-
ing; they are lending other people's money. They are
pure agents.

Now, I know that there have been a lot of other
people for whom the Government amended this Rate
of Interest Act, particularly people I am not going
to call names on the floor of this House who are
interested in mortgage finance. There has been alot
of pressure to get the Rate of Interest Act amended
here. If we consider land costs and house develop-
ment costs, if we are going to give to these institu-
tions unlimited power to lend at such rates as they
have, then in future many people in this country would
be forced into borrowing at a rate which is far in ex-
cess of their ability to repay.


The proper method for us to deal with attracting
money in this country for housing is not by this Bill,
but by an amendment or change of our Housing Incen-
tive legislation. That is the proper way to deal with it,
and other countries have found that that is an adequate
means of getting and attracting capital specifically for
the purpose of housing. Afterall, if youhave to pass a
Pioneer Industry Ordinance in order to attract indus -
try, a Hotel Ordinance in order to attract hotels and
money for hotel development in the country, it should
not be beyond the ingenuity of the draftsmen in this
country or of the financial advisers to the Ministry of
Finance or of the Minister of Finance himselfto de-











vise a scheme of incentives to ensure other people
who have money should be giving it.

All of this argument that you are preventing a
poor man from getting a loan is absolutely junk be-
cause they can go down there and get the personal
loans now, and if they compute the interest, they would
see that they are paying 13 and 14 percent interest.
Go and try. Go down there at the corner near the top
of Broad Street, on your left hand side going down, at
the Bank of Nova Scotia. See if when you make your
monthly repayments, they do not tack on the interest
to the loan at the payment. Divide it by the monthly
instalments, work it out over the twelve-month or
eighteen month period. See if you are not paying .much
more than 8 percent interest.
1.25 p.m.

If you ever go and borrow by hire purchase or
buy a motor car by hire purchase, you will under-
stand the position.

Now, Sir, another point that worries me with re-
spect to this Bill is this: some shopkeepers in this
country get credit from wholesalers under an ar-
rangement, as I understand it, that they pay after 30
or 60 days for the balance of their goods that they
owe to the wholesalers at the Bank rate, that is, the
rate charged by the commercial banks in this coun-
try. What is the position with that agreement? Are
the wholesalers going to be allowed to pass on the
undoubted increase in the rate of interest that the
banks are going to charge if this Bill becomes law,
to the shopkeepers, who are then going to pass it on
to the consumers? That is goingto be the logic of the
thing. This drastic change in this Act and in our rate
of interest in this country could only be necessitated
if it can be proven to this House that we are ceasing
to bring in money that we used to bring in in the past,
or that money that is here in Barbados now is leaving
this country; to go where?

The hon. senior member for St. Thomas has out-
lined the interest rates for a large number of se-
curities that are obtaining in the United Kingdom at
the present moment, and one is as high as 8 percent;
and if the same banks advisedortoldthe Prime Min-
ister that they are losing money because people are
carrying their money abroad to receive better rates
of interest, why didn't they in order to stem the tide
raise the rate of interest that they are paying to de-
positors in Barbados? The maximum is still 6 per
cent for a loan that is agreed that you do not call it
back before twelve months. I checked it this morning
myself. They still only pay six percent. Why don't
they raise it half per cent? This is another feature
of this Bill which Idislikeandwhichwe mast oppose.
Why should the Ministry of Finance want to approve
the lending rate so as to permit the banks to. charge
more? Why should they not also seek the power to
demand that there must be a relationship between
the borrowing rate by the banks from depositors and
the lending rate? With this Bill the banks can charge
9%, 10% or 20%, and there is nothing in the Bill that
says that the Prime Minister can stipulate that the
depositors on long term, that is, six months call or


twelve months call must get a higher rate of interest.
In other words, what we have here is a tiny minority
exercising complete financial control over credit in
this country. If there is a case or need for strong
legislation to control a group, it is for the banks in
this country. There are three or four of them, all
from abroad; they jumble the statistics; they are in a
position to do it; they still have Barbadians deposi-
tors' money lent to their Head Offices abroad. Are
they going to tell this House via any of their spokes-
men that when they borrow money from their Head
Offices abroad that they are borrowing at the English
Bank rate? That is utter nonsense. If any one of them
is in difficulty, the totality of the deposits in Barbados
is still less than the amount that they advance, unless
that has drastically changed since devaluation, and
if it had changed since devaluation, the Prime Minis-
ter would have used that as one of his reasons for
asking us to change this Bill. Bring the statistics,
bring the facts to prove to us here that this Bill is
absolutely necessary. Now, Sir, such are the views
that we have on this.
When it comes into Committee, we feel thatthis
Bill even as it stands will have to be sent to a Select
Committee so that we can get all the evidence. If
there are people who feel that they cannot come for-
ward and give information on the floor of the House
or within the confines of these Chambers, we can get
all the information we want, because we have had in
Barbados for a very long period of time this Rate
of Interest Act. It has been our means of protection
against exploitation. We do not feel that this means
which has served us so well for so long a period of
time should be lightly given up now because of a
panic attitude of a small group in this country. They
had within their means the power if they say that
money is going out. No money is going to go out from
Barbados unless it is going out to get more money,
more interest rates, or unless they have no confidence
in sterling. If they do not have any confidence in ster-
ling, it is not the Rate of Interest Act which is the
motivating factor. If it is the Rate of Interest Act,
then where and in what investments are they putting
it to get a better return thanhere? If they are getting
a better return on the time deposits in England, the
Banks have it within their power to change that; they
have to "up" their borrowing rate, just as the Build-
ing Societies and others have done in England. They
have to "up" the rate at which they borrow money
from depositors.

When the Bank rate in England was much lower
than 6 per cent, they were still charging people in
Barbados around 8 per cent. They were still getting
their depositors' money at a cheap rate, so now the
going is tough, they must bear some of it. We do not
want any generalised amendment just to cater for
them. In other words, they must at all times be in a
position where they can take advantage of any given
situation, and this Bill is an improper measure, in
my view, of controlling the whole situation. It is a
discriminatory Bill, and a Bill which can have a
profound effect upon the cost of living in this country,
and upon the credit structure in this country, and we
cannot on this side of the House approve of it in its
present form.











Mr. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I do not know much
about lending, but I know about borrowing and I will
be able to speak about borrowing more so than lend-
ing. Now the Objects and Reasons of this Bill say that
this Bill would amend the Rate of Interest Act, 1754,
to enable Banks licensed under the Banking Act, 1963,
and such other firms or bodies corporate as the Min-
ister responsible for Finance may by order specify
to lend money to persons in Barbados at a rate of
interest higher than 8 per cent per annum.

Now, Sir, I am very unhappy about this last part
which says "at a rate of interest higher than 8 per
cent per annum." We admit it will be higher, but how
high? It may be too high, Sir. A limit should be set,
and I feel that it should not be more than so much -
not more than 10 per cent,notmore than 12 per cent,
not more than 100%: but in this case it is only
"higher", and I am arguing that it can be too high.
It can go too high to be given such a wide margin.
The gap is too wide.
1.35 p.m.

With regard to the Bill, the Hon. Prime Minis-
ter has said that the Banks here have to be financed
by the banks overseas at a higher rate of interest.
That may be so, but at this present moment we have
to think about the borrowers. Business places today
have to borrow money to carry on their business, and
with the high cost of living soaring it is bound to
rise and with the interest rising, what is likely to
happen to us? Everything is going up, and it is bound
to hit the small people of this country.

As you know, Sir, I am very interested in the
small people. This Bill suits the 'big people'. This in-
terest can go every so high, but it cannot affect the
'big people', in my opinion. The only thing that can
effect a big man in this country today is death. When
death is ready for you, you cannot hide, no matter
how much money you have or how much interest you
should receive. When death calls your name,you will
have to answer.

When we are thinking of the small businessman,
it is already known that we are taxed to the highest
and we still have to carry on our business. To agree
to increase the rate of interest at this moment, I
would be saying "yes" to a rate of interest when I
cannot even tell my son or wife what I have voted for
today. If my son were to ask me what is the rate of
interest I have agreed to, and if he were to call me
a fool, I could not sendhim out of the house because I
would be foolish to agree to a Bill to increase the
rate of interest while I could not tell my son or the
people I represent what is the rate of interest.

I, and this entire House, should be in a position
to tell the public in other words, the Hon. Prime
Minister should be in a position to tell the people of
this country whether the rate of interest would be so-
and-so before we say "yes" to it. Howcan he expect
support from this side of the House on a Bill that he
is not sure about? It does not sound good and sensible
to me; it may be smarter than sensible because the
_present rate is 8%.


When you go to a bank tomorrow to borrow money
sign a note -and the Manager tells you that he can-
not tell you the rate of interest, would you sign the
note? How could you sign it? When you receive your
statement, the rate of interest may be more than you
could afford to pay. You may have to sell your house
to pay the interest. You would not do it, and the Hon.
Prime Minister would not do it. Nobody would sign
to borrow an amount of money when he did not know
the rate of interest he would have to pay on it.

I really thought when the Hon. Prime Minister
had adjourned the House for a few weeks, he had done
so in order to go into the matter and see whether he
could put a ceiling on it or find out how it would op-
erate. He has brought back the Bill inthe same way.
I am sure he would not borrow money under such an
agreement. If the Hon. Prime Minister cannot satisfy
us no more than he has done on the last time when he
was introducing it, then the Bill should be sent to a
Select Committee and the banking people should be
called in to discuss the matter so thatwe can arrive
at a proper rate of interest.

I do not want the lenders to lose, and I do not
want the borrowers to lose. I want an equitable agree-
ment so that the country can go on as it is going on.
I know to myself that the majority of money-lenders
would say that if they cannot get the rate of interest
they want, then they would call in their money and
stop the money wheel from turning. I know what will
happen to Barbados. I am not so simple, foolish, or
blind, to see that. I know how dangerous it could be.
However, I cannot allow advantage to be taken of the
people. Let us arrive at the maximum amount of in-
terest.

As I said before, I do not know anything about
the lending business; I do not know anything about
overhead expenses and so on. The lending houses
have to make a profit, and I know that overhead ex-
penses and things of that sort will have to be offset.
Everything will depend on the rate of interest, but let
us know what it will be.

If the Hon. Prime Ministerhadtoldus last Tues-
day, when he was introducing this Bill, that he had
called in the lendinghouses and they had told him that
they could not carry on unless the interest was so
much, then we would be able to understand the Hon.
Prime Minister and say "yes". He said that whatever
interest was charged by the banks overseas would
have to be paid by the banks over here. It would be
necessary for us to knowwhat is the interest charged
over there. He should not leave it at the mercy of
the banks over there to say that the interest would
be 20%, or 30%, and the banks over here would have
to pay it. We should know what is the interest rate
over there.


Now you already have a certain amount of money
' circularised. The lending houses have the money cir-
cularised already; it is inthe hands of the borrowers,
and it is being spent.
1.45 p.m.











That is in their hands already. Well, then, are
you going to tell me that you are giving the lenders
the opportunity to put it upon me, to hit me although
I have had it for the last two or three years, to in-
crease my rate without knowing really and truly
what is the increase from overseas? If the banks here
have to take the time from the banks overseas, the
banks will have so much in their till over here that
they are lending it out; they would never have to apply
to the banks overseas for the high rate of interest.
They are operating on this; the high rate is in the
people's hands over there. It is quite different from
when you are paying a sixty-day or thirty-day grace
payment. If you have already ordered goods over the
last thirty or sixty days, it is just as you have sold
the goods at the old prices, but the time was not due
to pay up, and now you have to pay on the new prices.
That is where a business house stands to lose, but
this is a limited time. You would be paying for not
paying before and you will have to be satisfied with
that. With this rate of interest, we do not know what
will be the rate of interest.

As I was saying, Sir the Prime Minister was
not here I know that he would not go to any bank -
he is too intelligent a person -or any money lender
and sign a document borrowing a few thousand pounds,
not knowing what is the rate of interest. Your Honour
would not do it either. You may take the chance to lend
it in that way and the Prime Minister might take the
chance to lend it in that way, but he is not going to
borrow it under those conditions. We are in the dark.
We are passing Bill: butas soon as we get out of the
door and we go and meet the people whom we repre-
sent, our constituents, and they were to ask us not
the Prime Minister because he may be in the know -
but if they were to ask any one of the other twenty-
three of us in here, what will be the rate of interest
since this Bill has been passed, none of us could say.
That is not fair to us. You do not have to go to Har-
rison College to know that. In that case, you will have
to leave me out because I did not go there; but I will
wait at the door and when you come back out, I would
have some question to bowl you with. You have to
consider the borrowers; you have some people today
who are operating completely on borrowing. You have
some people who are operating businesses and if their
guarantor says: "No", business has gone through the
eddoes. I am nlot ashamed. I had to go to one whom I
thought was my best friend, to pull me out. He ap-
pointed a morning to go to the bank to be my guarantor
and at the morning when I called him Jp he said:"No
Sonny, I cannot worry." You cannot carry on until
you are loaned money. If youhave to face extra over-
head expenses, that is what is going to hit you. You
have to budget to suit. The price of goods is going up
and it will appear to me that the higher you go, the
lesser the profit will be. I can quite clearly see I do
not know who is responsible for the prices; they are
only thinking in terms of the consumer, andthey may
be right, but they are not thinking of the business
person. If it is one half-cent that will make the profit
a little too much, they will take it off and make the
profit half-cent too little. You stand to lose all around.
You are not allowed to make the profit you were
making before and now you will have the increase -


Mr. Speaker, I should not be speaking on this Bill
because I cannot say what will be the rate. I cannot
talk as I would like to talk. Anyhow, you should not
try to blame me if I say that twenty-five per cent is
the rate of interest. You leave me to say that. I can
say that the rate is ten per cent. I can say ten per
cent but I cannot say seven per cent, because the
Bill says eight per cent. I can say that the rate is
nine per cent. That is how I understand the Bill to be.
The Prime Minister should try to relieve our fears

and let us know, in truth and infact, what will be the
rate of interest and do not leave us hanging on to a
limb to pass a Bill of this nature without stating the
rate of interest. I cannot vote for it like that because
I may be voting against my own self; I may be voting
away "Fix-it-Right" Garage, I do notknow.Imay be
assisting to vote away people's lives, properties, and
so on.
1.55 p.m.

I hope that the Prime Minister will consider if
the increase will be too high. Please do not say it now
to give us a shock, but take it back and see if you can
fix-it-right and get it much lower. Find out from
these people that lend the money what can
be done.

Another point is this. The Prime Minister as-
sured us that it would be only the banks and it is
nothing to do with the mortgagees. In other words, I
take it that not all the Solicitors would be lending out
money. I am not afraid to speak my mind. If by
speaking my mind it would cost my life, well let me
die and go to heaven. It would not be fair to let one
money lender with his dollar bill be able to charge
whatever he likes on his dollar, and stiffle the other
one. Both are serving the same purpose.

You are borrowing from the bank to buy a motor
car, I am borrowing from a Solicitor to pay for pro-
perty. We all are borrowing to pay for something. It
is not fair. I cannot stand for unfair things. I hope I
will not be misunderstood. I do not have any to lend.
I said so at the first instance. I will amend that be-
cause when you are a politician, you call it 'lend', but
you give it away because they will say 'lend', but they
never pay back; so it is not lending. If everybody used
to lend like a politician, everyone would collapse. To
a politician, lending is giving.

I am saying that I do not have anything to lend out;
I do not know if the Hon. Prime Minister has anything
to lend out. I do not think Your Honour has anything
to lend out. I am only saying what I think now. I may
be wrong. I dare suppose when I go outside, the Hon.
Prime Minister might tell me, "well, boy child, you
are wrong; I have some money to lend out." He may,
but I am only thinking that he has nothing to lend out.

Well, start and think inafairplayway. If you are
going to allow A to increase his, allowB. In my opi-
nion I feel that the mortgagees, or whatever you call
them, are doing a little better job, or they have to
hold the strain more so than the banks. I feel so. Well,
the Solicitors would know that because with the banks,
if it is the end of the month, it is the end of the month.


~II_ ___-__ __I__ __ _











They give you no more chance, but you have a little.
chance with the mortgagees. You may get another
month's grace afterwards.

They also have to hold the strain a little better,
and they should be considered, and given a berry.
If you are going to do that and give a little berry, it
should be to the mortgagees that have money in peo -
ple's homes, because if they should just call them in,
they would be a pest to the Government to get a house
somewhere for them to sleep because whenever you
hear that money from -he Solicitor is loaned out, the
most of it is loaned out for the purpose of buying a
home or property somewhere for people to sleep
and live.


The banks are for business. All are important:
but the mortgagee A even sometimes lend and do
not get back.

There are Solicitors who are treated in that
manner too. I understand so. Iheard so and I can say
anything in here which I hear. I cannot get actioned
for anything which I say in here; so I can talk as I
like in here. I hear sometime that the Solicitors
draw from the vendor or the lender and they do not
get it back, but with the banks that cannot happen.

I do not think that the Prime Minister might have
been thinking along these lines when he was going into
this particular Bill. He might not know that, but it is
these little things which would creep in and open up
some light, so that he would know how to act.

Anyway, Sir, it is not fair and I say it again
for the second time -to allowone man with his dollar
bill to get a higher rate of interest and the other one
not to get it. We are all lenders and we are all bor-
rowers; but at the same time do not let us amend this
Bill to such an extent that we would be penalizing the
borrowers. You could never penalize a lender. He is
not going to allow you to do that because if the Prime
Minister should fix this rate of interest to such an
extent that the lender would lose, he is not going to
lose because he is not goingto lend anybody anything.
I am sure about that; but ifwe fix it in a way that the
borrower would lose, poor fellow, he then has to grin
and bear it or lose all of his possessions.

I appeal to you, Mr. Prime Minister, to do the
best that you possibly can as far as this Rate of In-
terest is concerned, but I cannot vote for it until I
am assured and until I know what would be the rate
of interest.

Mr. HINDS: Mr. Speaker, Sir, ever since the
21st November, this Bill was an urgent one. It might
mean therefore that it is longer than we think.

I say that this Bill is aprivilegedone especially
because it seeks to give to the Minister of Finance
the authority, he and he alone, to license firms,
bodies and to give banks authority to lend out money
at a rate of interest higher than eight per cent. Now,
Sir, we believe that at this very hour the Minister of


Finance would have it before him the number of
bodies or firms that he proposes licensing.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: In order to save the hon.
member from wasting his time, I have no such list.

Mr. SPEAKER: On what is the hon. member
speaking?

Hon. E. W. BARROW: I am on a point of order.
Therefore, he must only speak of what he has before
him. I have no such list of any bodies or firms whom
I propose or intend to license at all. I will like to
make that clear. I doubt, even if there were such a list
before me at this juncture, that they would obtain any
such approval.

Mr. HINDS: No one would thinkthat if the Minis-
ter of Finance had before him alistof firms seeking
a licence that he would set about to license them at
this stage. The Prime Minister will have to wait until
this Bill is passed.


The Prime Minister jumped to his feet, Sir, and
let it be known that he had no list before him. The
list, Sir, would have to be something in writing or
print.
2.05 p.m.

He need not have it in writing; he need not have
it printed; but we feel that the Prime Minister has in
his mind some of the firms that he will be licensing
as soon as this Bill becomes law. With the speed,
with the fleetness of foot of the Prime Minister, I
am to wonder if he really jumped up to make us be-
lieve that the West Indies Stock Exchange, the Pro-
cope Firm, will not be one of those licensed when the
time comes. There can be no doubt that this Bill is
a 'get-rich-quickly' Bill for somebody, and it would
be a good thing if the Prime Minister would set about
or if he had set about when introducing this Bill to
let this House understand that it is not the Minister
of Finance who is likely to get rich quickly when this
Bill becomes law.

Now, Sir, we have been hearing about local banks
borrowing money from their overseas Head Offices.
We know now that this is not true anymore, and
furthermore when they did borrow in the past, they
borrowed money at 4 per cent, 4 1/2 per cent and
possibly five per cent, and that money was loaned out
at 8 per cent, andwhathas happened on the 18th, 19th
and 20th November or thereabouts is nothing new to
people who have really been studying the finance of
this country, and particularly the countries with which
Barbados has been dealing.

It was in December, 1965, when President
Johnson of the United States warned the U.S. busi-
nessmen that if they were going overseas to invest,
they should see wherever possible that they usedthe
money of the countries in which they were going to
set up their industries. If we were to follow the his-
tory of let us say, our Development Board, we would
find that the North Americans and others who have











come down here and sought to establish themselves
have been doing exactly what they have been told to do
way back in December, 1965; so when we find now
that it is being trotted out to this House that the de-
valuation, this increase in the rate of interest, and
making more interest available to certain lenders,
and bodies or firms are going to bring more capital
to Barbados, it is not true at all because if the in-
vestor is taking advantage and has been taking ad-
vantage of the incentives offered by Barbados and
other Caribbean territories, the inducement is al-
ready there. For instance, here in Barbados, thou-
sands upon thousands of dollars belonging to the local
taxpayer have been taken to build factories for some
of these business people who have come down here.
For instance, Sir, in one swoop $126,000 went into
one factory to set up a business firm here; so you
will see, Sir, that all the inducement and all the en-
couragement to get these firms to come here are al-
ready given by the Barbados Government, and, we
believe, by some of the other Governments in the
Caribbean.

Now, Sir, we have heard the situation with some
of our banks or rather of the commercial banks taking
fixed deposits. They take fixed deposits, dependingon
the quantum, at 4 1/2 per cent for twenty-five years
and maybe at 3 1/2 per cent in some cases and invest
that money or lend it out at 8 per cent. Are we to un-
derstand now that these same banks are going to be
allowed by the Minister of Finance to continue to take
in money at 4 1/2 per cent and lend it out at an in-
terest rate of 8 per cent? What we need is not re-
moving the ceiling, but if it is necessary and we
see that it is not necessary to increase this rate
of interest let us understand here and now what is
going to be the position.

SUSPENSION OF SITTING

Mr. HINDS: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move that this
sitting be now suspended for three quarters of an
hour.

Mr. HOPPIN: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division, and Mr. SPEAKER suspended the sitting
acc ordingly.

2.15 p.m.
On resumption:

Mr, SPEAKER: When the sitting was suspended,
the hon. junior member for St. Peter was addressing
the Chair. He may, if he wishes, now continue.

Hon. C. E. TALMA: Mr. Speaker, before the busi-
ness of the House is continued, I think this is an ap-
propriate stage to lay the various papers andto give
notice of the various Resolutions, as was requested
earlier at today's sitting. With Your Honour's ap-
proval, I am asking for leave to give notice of the
various Resolutions and Bills, and to lay the various
Papers which have now been sent to this Chamber.


Mr. SPEAKER: In view of the fact that permission
was asked earlier and there was no intimation of any
objection to the course now proposed being taken, as
the Papers had not arrived, I will permit the Hon.
Acting Leader of the House to give notice, at this
stage, and I will extend a similar indulgence to Pri-
vate Members who were not in their places. I will now
call on the hon. member for St. Peter to resume his
seat in order to allow notices to be given which should
have been given earlier today on both sides of the
House.

DOCUMENTS LAID

Hon. C. E. TALMA: Mr. Speaker, I am com-
manded, on behalf of the Hon. Leader of the House and
Minister of Caribbean and Latin-American Affairs,
to lay the following:-

The Passport and Travel Documents (Fees)
Order, 1967.

GOVERNMENT NOTICES

Hon. C. E. TALMA: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the
Hon. Leader of the House, I beg to give notice of a
Resolution to approve the leasing of land situated be-
tween Prescod Boulevard and the rear boundaries of
properties on the West of Fontabelle Road as des-
cribed in the schedule to the Resolution.

On behalf of the Hon. Prime Minister, Minister
of Finance and External Affairs, I beg to give notice
of a Resolution to place the sum of $91,145 at the dis-
posal of the Government to supplement the Estimates
1967-68 Part I Current as shown inthe Supplemen-
tary Estimates 1967-68 No. 35 which form the Sche-
dule to the Resolution.

Also I beg to give notice of a Bill to authorise
the Government of Barbados from time to time to bor-
row sums of money limited in the aggregate to 20
million dollars from any bank, corporation, or other
institution for purposes to be approved by Parliament.

Mr. G. G. FERGUSSON: Mr. Speaker, I beg to
give notice of a Bill to amendthe Petroleum Act,1950.

Hon. N. W. BOXILL: Mr. Speaker, I beg to give
notice of the Resolution to place the sum of $4,034 at
the disposal of the Government to supplement the
Estimates, 1967-68 Part I Current as shownin the
Supplementary Estimates, 1967-68 No. 37 which form
the Schedule to this Resolution.

Also I beg to give notice of a Resolution to amend
the note to Current Estimates under Head 11, Item 17
- Ex Gratia Gratuities in the Approved Estimates
1967-68.

I am also asking permission of the House to deal
with those two Resolutions in all of their stages at
today's sitting because these are matters of urgency.

Mr. SPEAKER: Have copies been circulated?











Hon. N. W. BOXILL: Yes, Mr. Speaker.

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: Mr. Speaker, I beg to
give notice of a Resolution to give sanction to The
Shops Order 1967. I should like to ask the House to
deal with this Resolution in all of its stages at today's
sitting. Copies of the Resolution have already been
circulated to members.

ORAL REPLIES TO PARLIAMENTARY
QUESTIONS

Hon. N. W. BOXILL: Mr. Speaker, I beg to give
notice that the Oral Replies to the following Questions
are ready:-

Parliamentary Question No. 28 asked by the hon.
senior member for St. Joseph:

Parliamentary Question No. 24 asked by the hon.
senior member for St. James:

Parliamentary Question No. 23 asked by the hon.
senior member for St. James: and

Parliamentary Question No. 98 asked by the hon.
senior member for St. James.
3.10 p.m.

Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON: Mr. Speaker, I beg to
give notice that the Oral Reply to Parliamentary
Question No. 18, asked by the hon. senior member for
St. Joseph is ready; also the Oral Reply to Parlia-
mentary Question No. 94 asked by the hon. senior
member for St. James.

Hon. C. E. TALMA: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the
Hon. Leader of the House, I beg to give notice that the
Oral Reply to Parliamentary Question No. 81, asked
by the hon. senior member for St. Thomas, is ready.

On my own behalf, I beg to give notice that the
Oral Reply to Parliamentary Question No. 87, asked
by the hon. junior member for St. Peter, is also ready

PETITION

Mr. St. JOHN: Mr. Speaker, I beg to present a
Petition on behalf of Manning & Co. Ltd., The Petition
is respectfully worded and it is praying the House to
pass a Bill which has, as its object, the re-alignment
of parts of the roads and sidewalks forming the boun-
daries of the buildings known as No. 1 Broad Street,
subject to the approval of the Town and Country Plan-
ning Officer and in compliance with the provisions
of the Town and Country Planning Regulations. A copy
of the Plan is annexed. I ask that the Petition be taken
as read.

Mr. SPEAKER: Is the Petition respectfully
worded?


Mr. St. JOHN: I said that it is respectfully worded.


Mr. SPEAKER: I am glad for that assurance.


PRIVATE MEMBERS' NOTICES

Mr. SPEAKER: Resolution standing in the name
of the hon. junior member for St. Peter in respect of
Pico Teneriffe.

Mr. HINDS: Mr. Speaker, I beg to give notice of
the following Resolution:

BE IT RESOLVED that this House desires to see
a tangible and meaningful expression speedily given
to the Prime Minister's Budget Proposal reference on
30th June, 1967, to wit:-

"to the panorama of Pico Teneriffe";

AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Govern-
ment be urged to take steps to enhance the panoramic
and historic values of this important landmark by con-
structing an approach road from a point near the 18-
mile stone at Boscobelle, St. Peter to a point nearest
the said Pico Teneriffe, so as to make this landmark
accessible to tourists and visitors to the islandgen-
erally; and at the same time providing anopportunity
for peasant holders in the area to get their produce to
market.

Mr. SPEAKER: The same hon. member, his
Resolution apropos pupils forsaking attendance at
schools during the crop season.

Mr. HINDS: Mr. Speaker, I beg to give notice of
the following Resolution:-

WHEREAS pupils of several private Secondary
Schools in this Island forsake attending school during
the crop season or part thereof and during such ab-
sence from school, are employed for wages on the
sugar estates in this island in the harvesting of the
sugar cane;

AND WHEREAS that despite such employment on
the estates the names of parents or guardians of the
said school pupils are recorded in the estates' books
and wages earned by the said school-childrenforty-
ing, heading and loading canes in the fields are drawn
or received by parents, guardians or agents in respect
of the said work done;

BE IT RESOLVED that this House request the
Government to investigate the incidence of school-
children being employed as labourers as stated above,
and seek to take steps to remedy such a situation,
bearing in mind the adverse social and economic con-
ditions under which some sugar and estate workers
and their children in this new Nation live from day to
day.

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. senior member for
Christ Church; his Bill relating to the re-alignment
of roads and sidewalks at No. 1 Broad Street.

Mr. St. JOHN: Mr. Speaker, I beg to give notice
of a Bill authorising the re-alignment of parts of the
roads and sidewalks forming the boundaries of the
buildings known as No. I. Broad Street.











QUESTIONS

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. junior member for St.
Peter. His question re Commercial banks in Bridge-
town.

Mr. HINDS: Mr. Speaker, to enquire of the ap-
propriate Minister:-
1. Which Commercial Bank in Bridgetown
received, in terms of money, the most business of the
Barbados Development Board's customers in each
year 1964, 1965, 1966 and the year 1967 to date?

2. If any one Bank enjoyed business to any
considerable extent over the other banks, would Gov-
ernment state which Bank, and what is the volume of
business over other banks in terms of East Caribbean
dollars?

3. Do any officers of the Barbados Develop-
ment Board or Members thereof act in any manner
as canvassing agents for any commercial bank or
banks in this City?

Mr. SPEAKER: The same hon. member. His
question re loan capital through the Barbados De-
velopment Board.

Mr. HINDS: Mr. Speaker, to enquire of the ap-
propriate Minister:-

1. How many clients or customers of the
Barbados Development Board who have established
business here or who have received loan capital
through the said Board, in each year since 1964 to
date, were given the opportunity of alternative Banks
in this island with which to deal?

2. If there was no alternative suggestion or
arrangement or provision of banking services in re-
spect of negotiations by the Boardwith a commercial
bank or banks concerned, will Government explain
the reason for this practice?

3. Does Government not consider such action
to be reprehensible and against the best interest of
long-term relationships between commercial banks
in this Island and the Board?

Mr. SPEAKER: The same hon. member. His
question re workers employed by International
Scientific Limited.

Mr. HINDS: Mr. Speaker, to enquire of the Ap-
propriate Minister:-

Is Government aware of the presence in this
Island of a business firm operatingunder the name of
International Scientific Limited?

2. How many Barbadian workers under 40
years of age have been employed by this firm in its
first year of operations here threading memory cores
or doing similar work?

3. Is Government aware of the highly scien-
tific nature of the work these workers perform?


4. Are they adequately compensated for the
type of work they do?

5. Is Government aware that the long hours
these workers perform, and the meticulousness and
exactness of the tasks involved, impose a consider-
able strain on the eyesight of these workers?

6. With a view to ensuring whether or not
there is impairment to the health of these workers,
particularly the eyesight, would Government under-
take to have checks made on the eyes of a number of
these workers by the Department of Ophthalmology
of the Queen Elizabeth Hospital?

7. If tests reveal the presence of weakness of
the eyesight of workers and the presence of myosis
resulting from the nature of the said work, would
Government stipulate that

(a) regular tests of the eyes of these work-
ers be carried out;

(b) all workers employed by this firm be
specially insured against loss of eyesight,
impairment thereof, and particularly, con-
traction of the pupil of the eye?

8. How many workers employed by this firm
have been medically advised to wear spectacles since
being employed there?

9. How many workers have not been finan-
cially able to meet the requirements of the advice
given at 8 above?
3.20 p.m.

BILLS READ A FIRST TIME

Hon. C. E. TALMA: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move
that a Bill to authorise the Government of Barbados
from time to time to borrow sums of money limited
in the aggregate to 20 million dollars from any bank,
corporation, or other institution for purposes to be
approved by Parliament, be now read a first time.

Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.

Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON: Mr. Speaker, I beg to
move that a Bill to amend the Petroleum Act, 1950,
be now read a first time.

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.

Mr. St. JOHN: I beg to move that a Bill to au-
thorise Messrs. Manning & Co., Ltd., to re-align
parts of the road and sidewalks forming boundaries
of the building known as No. 1 Broad Street, be now
read a first time.

Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: I beg to second that.











The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.

QUESTION TIME

Hon. C. E. TALMA: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move
that Question Time be now taken.

Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.

DELAYS IN HEARING JUDGMENT SUMMONSES

Mr. SPEAKER: I declare it is now Question time.

Question No. 81 stands in the name of the hon.
senior member for St. Thomas.

Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: To enquire of the ap-
propriate Minister:

1. Is the Governmene aware that delays of up
to 3 months are beingexperienced in having Judgment
Summonses heard in the Magistrate's Court of Dis-
trict "A" and that this is causing great hardship to
litigants?

2. Will the Government take steps, by re-
assignments of Magistrates or otherwise,to speedup
the work of the Civil side of the Magistrate's Court
concerned?

Hon. C. E. TALMA: On behalf of the Hon. Leader
of the House I would like to lay the following Replies.

1. "Yes, Sir."

2. "Remedial measures have been taken and
the system is now working satisfactorily. No re-
assignment of Magistrates has been necessary."

Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: This is a supplementary
Sir. Since the Minister stated that no reassignment of
Magistrates has been necessary, would he explain how
is it that since the question was asked, there have
been three different Magistrates in the Court con-
cerned, and only this month has a full time Magis -
trate been finally appointed?

Mr. SPEAKER: He would not know that.

Mr, J. M. G. M. ADAMS: A further supplemen-
tary, Sir. Could the Minister say what are the re-
medial measures that the Government has under-
taken?


Hon. C. E. TALMA: This matter has been very
fully investigated, and it was discovered that ap-
plications for judgment summonses were filed atthe
rate of 60 to 75 a week. Prior to 1966, the date of
hearing was fixed at the date two or three weeks from
the date of filing.


The particular Magistrate in charge of the Civil
Court gave instructions to limit the number of judg-
ment summonses to 40 per week. The result was an
accumulation which got bigger as time went on, and
the dates for hearing were set further off, until the
stage was reached when the date for hearing was
fixed at three months from the date of filing.

That went on for sometime. I said that the matter
has been gone into and has been remedied. The Ma-
gistrate in charge of the Civil Court at District "A",
is not overworked, and there has been a reassess-
ment of Magistrates' duties and Magistrates. That
question therefore does not arise andhe is quite cap-
able of coping with the work.

Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Afinal supplementary.
If the Magistrate had not been re-assigned, can the
Minister explain how is it that the Magistrate who
at the time had limited the judgment summonses to
only 40 a week and who was then carrying out magis-
terial duties at Belleplaine and at Bissex Hill and is
now carrying them out in the District "A" Court, if
there is no re-assessment, how is it that that Magis-
trate is not now in that Court?
3.30 p.m.

Hon. C. E. TALMA: Mr. Speaker, the hon. and
learned member for St. Thomas must realise that
there is a judicial Service Commission as such, and
that politicians do not have any control over Magis-
trates by way of transfer, assignment, re-assign-
ment, discipline or otherwise; so when the hon.
member comes in here and poses those supplemen-
taries, I think he is in a better position to answer
them because he is a lawyer in active practice and
should keep his ears to the ground and find out what
is going on at the Judicial Service Commissionlevel
and at the Law Courts.

Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, in any
case I thank the Government for making sure that
there is a Magistrate in that Court who will hear all
the judgment summonses, and not limit them to forty
per week.

Mr. SPEAKER: Question No. 87 stands in the

name of the hon. junior member for St. Peter.

Mr. HINDS: Mr. Speaker, the question reads as
follows: -

To enquire of the appropriate Minister:-

1. Is Government aware that on 24th May,
1967, a female Nurse attached to the Enmore Health
Centre became ill whilst on duty?

2. Is Government aware that the said Nurse
was rushed from the Enmore Health Centre to the
Casualty Department at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital
in search of medical treatment?

3. Is Government aware that the Nurse's
complaint was diagnosed as Coronary Thrombosis










and the Casualty doctor ordered her immediate ward-
ing at the Hospital?

4. Does Government know that this Nurse,
still wearing her uniform of office was denied ad-
mission to the Hospital Ward?

5. Who refused her admission?

6. Does Government consider such refusal
in the interest of the Nurse's health and of the Queen
Elizabeth Hospital in general?

7. Would Government state what effect if any,
such cruel treatment meted out to a sick Nurse, and
under such circumstances, has had on the nursing
staff in general at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital?

8. Was the refusal to admit the sick Nurse to
the Ward an action which can be supported by Gov-
ernment?

9. If the answer to No. 8 above is in the nega-
tive, what steps have been taken or does Government
propose taking to ensure that there will never be a
repetition of such conduct?

Hon. C. E. TALMA: Mr. Speaker, the Replies are
as follows:-

1. "Yes, Sir.

2. Yes, Sir.

3. There was no firm diagnosis, butthepro-
visional diagnosis which could only be confirmed after
full investigation was coronary insufficiency.

4. Investigation has revealed that while wait-
ing to be admitted to the ward, the patient was induced
by someone not on the Hospital staff to leave the
premises despite assurances from the Nurse andthe
Doctor that: arrangements were being expedited for
her admission.

5. No one.

6.

7. Does not arise."
8.
9. J

Mr. HINDS: Mr. Speaker, would the Minister
tell us how many years standing this sick Nurse
has in the service of the Hospital?

SHon. C. E. TALMA: If the hon.memberwants to
know something further about the Nurse in question,
he would probably have to pose a substantive ques-
tion; but as far as this particular Nurse is concerned,
she fell ill on 24th May, and she is attached to the
Enmore Health Centre. She complained of retro-
sternal pain which radiated down her left forearm,
and she told the doctor over there that last year she
had been treated in New York for coronary insuf-
ficiency. It is not the first time that she has been


suffering from this particular illness, and after
the examination she was sent to the Hospital and dealt
with in the Casualty; she was sent on from the Cas-
ualty and she was being dealt with by the doctor in
charge of a Ward, who was checking on the entire
case, since the papers had not come to him from the
Casualty, and during that interim, she became rest-
less and was induced to leave. To say that she was
not being given admission or they had no intention of
treating her is not correct. Those are the bones of
the case, and if the hon. member wants any further
information, he can pose further questions; but I have
all the particulars right here and I have given chapter
and verse.

Mr. MOTTLEY: Mr. Speaker, as a supplemen-
tary, can the Hon. Minister deny that when the Cas-
ualty doctor took this Nurse to the Ward, the doctor
in charge of the Ward said he did not give a damn
who she was whether she was a Nurse or otherwise,
and this was done in the presence of the Nurses and
other doctors?

Mr. Speaker, I cannot continue to speak to you
in the Chair because I see another speaker on my
left.

Mr. SPEAKER: Speaker, with a small "s".

Hon. C. E. TALMA: Mr. Speaker, I canonly say
that the doctor's attitude appeared not to be all that
was desired. He has been brought before the Public
Service Commission. Investigations have been made
and the necessary disciplinary actionhas been taken.

Mr. SPEAKER: Parliamentary Question No. 18
stands in the name of the hon. senior member for St.
Joseph.

Mr. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, the question reads as
follows: -

To enquire of the appropriate Minister:

Is Government aware of the necessity for the
erection of a fish shed and latrine andthe installation
of fresh water therein for use of the fishermen and
fish vendors at Tent Bay, Bathsheba, St. Joseph?

If the answer is in the affirmative, will the Gov-
ernment take the necessary steps to have same
erected without further delay?
3.40 p.m.

Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON: Mr. Speaker, the reply
to Question No. 18 asked by the hon. senior member
for St. Joseph is as follows:-

Yes, Sir.
Consideration will be given to the provision of
these facilities at Tent Bay, in the near future.

Mr. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary ques-
tion, Sir. Is the Minister in apositionto let me know
if this shed and the necessary facilities will be im-
plemented by February next year?


r











Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON: Mr. Speaker, I cannot
give a guarantee, but consideration will be given to
the matter as soon as possible. I can only make
recommendations, and the matter has to be dealt with
by other Departments. It is for the other Departments
to say how soon it can be done.

Mr. SMITH: Can the Minister tellme whether the
water has already been installed in that area?
Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON: I can assure the hon.
member that there is water up to the Caretaker's
house, and that is where the fishermen obtain their
water at present. We have surveyedthe area,and are
considering the building of a shed and other facilities
which will extend right down to the beach because that
is the only area of land suitable for the purpose.

Mr. St. JOHN: Now that we are talking about fish-
ermen at Tent Bay, one wonders whether the Minister
is aware that they have cut off the water at Oistins so
that the fishermen cannot get water there. (Asides)

Mr. SPEAKER: That does not arise. There is a
Lobby available for hon. members who desire to
pursue private discussions. Question No. 28, page 4,
right hand column, standing in the name of the hon.
senior member for St. Joseph.

PAYMENT OF PENSIONS TO EMPLOYEES
OF HIGHWAY COMMISSIONERS

Mr. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, to enquire of the appro -
priate Minister:

1. Is Government aware of the great difficult -
ties and sufferings experienced by former employees
of the St. Joseph Highway Commissioners, caused
by the long delay in the payment of pensions and/or
gratuities in respect of their services with the High-
way Commissioners of the said Parish?

2. If the answer is inthe affirmative,will the
Minister please state why these former employees
have been so treated, and when it is proposed to re-
lieve their distress by authorising the payment of
such pensions and/or gratuities as may be due to
them?

Hon. N. W. BOXILL: Mr. Speaker,the reply is as
follows:

No, Sir.

2. Legislation has recently been enacted to
include service with the Commissioners of Highways
for the parish of St. Joseph as pensionable service.
These employees who now qualify for retiring bene-
fits and have not yet receivedthemwill receive them
shortly.

Mr. SMITH: As a supplementary, Sir. Can the
Minister tell me whether they will receive that before
Christmas in order to get a Christmas dinner?

Hon. N. W. BOXILL: Mr. Speaker, it must be
pointed out that the service with the Commissioners


of Highways for the parish of St. Joseph was not
counted as pensionable service before this Govern-
ment came into power. In reply to the Question which
the hon. member has asked, I shouldlike to state that
my Ministry does not deal with pensions. Pensions
were formerly dealt with by the Public Service, but
the Establishments Department is now dealing with
Pensions. I think there were five persons involved,
and three of them have already received their money.
Maybe, they have not yet returned to him. I was try-
ing to get the names of the two people the Department
was working on this morning, so that he would know
to go and visit them and make his demands.

Mr. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, you will note that I did
not ask how many. I asked whether the Minister could
tell me if they would receive the little "berry" before
Christmas in order to get a Christmas dinner. He
gave me information that I did not ask him for.

Hon. N. W. BOXILL: Mr. Speaker, I think I have
made myself clear to the hon. member. Some of the
people have been paid already, andtwo others will be
paid shortly.

Mr. SPEAKER: There are no other replies laid
in respect of hon. members who are in their places.

RESOLUTION re THE SHOPS ORDER 1967

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: Mr. Speaker, I should
like to ask that the Resolution of which I have given
notice today in connection with the Shop Order 1967
be now dealt with as the next Order of the day.

Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.

Mr. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, Ionlysawtwoof these
documents, and the Shops Order is not here.

Mr. SPEAKER: I am having that attended to and
rectified immediately. Let the hon. memberproceed.
3.50 p.m.

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: Mr. Speaker,this mat-
ter is not controversial. I think hon. members are
aware that for the past two years this has been done.
We are having a comprehensive Order, or rather a
Shops Act, drafted as a matter of fact, it has al-
ready been drafted and it should have been intro-
duced in the Legislature before. It was sent to the
interested bodies and it was delayed with them, but I
promise hon. members to get it introduced in the
Legislature as soon as possible, which would make
the implementation of an Order like this every No-
vember or December unnecessary.

This Order is similar to that which we dealt with
last year at this time and the year before. It is making
provision for the late opening of shops on Monday,
December 18th, on Tuesday, December 19th, on Wed-
nesday, December 20th and on Thursday, December
21st. Shops would be permitted to remainopenunder


C __






1000


_the Shops Order until 6 p.m. on those days, and on the,
Friday preceding Christmas, the shops will be per-
mitted to remain open until 7.30 p.m. Every Friday
between now and Christmas the shops will be per-
mitted to remain open until 7.30 p.m. and this will
assist people who have been working during the day
and who would like to do their shopping in the early
evening. I beg to move that this Resolution do now
pass.

Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON: I beg to second that.

The question that this Resolution do now pass was put
and resolved in the affirmative without division.

RESOLUTION TO AMEND NOTE re
EX GRATIA GRATUITIES

Hon. N. W. BOXILL: Mr. Speaker, Ibegto move
that the Resolution of which notice has just been given
a Resolution that the note to the Current Estimates
under Head 11, Item 17 Ex Gratia Gratuities in the
Approved Estimates 1967-68 be amended to read as
follows: -

"To meet the cost of Ex-Gratia Awards" be
taken as the next Order of the Day.

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.

Mr. SPEAKER: The next Order of the Day stands
in the name of the Hon. Minister of Comnunications
and Works:- To move the passing of the following
Resolution:- Resolution that the note to the Current
Estimates under Head 11, Item 17 Ex Gratia Gra-
tuities in the Approved Estimates 1967 -68 be amended

Hon. N. W. BOXILL: Mr. Speaker, the reason for
this Resolution is this: I do not thinkthat hon. mem-
bers would necessarily want me to be lengthy on this
matter, but this has occurred because of a worker
who was working as a signalman at the Port. He was
at the Port for some time but he has reached the age
limit and he has to retire. He was an old seaman; he
has not got the necessary ten-year period of service
with the Government and thus he is not entitled to a
pension. However, we had made a decision formerly
that if a man has served with the Government for a
period of five years or over, although he does not
qualify for a pension, we would consider him for a
gratuity. As a result of this decision, this Resolution
has been brought down here to amend the note so that
this worker should be paid a gratuity. I beg to move
that this Resolution do now pass.

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: I beg to second that.

Mr. St. JOHN: Mr. Speaker, we, on this side,
agree with the terms of this Resolution, but there is
one thing which is worrying us. It is this: From time
to time there are a large number of people who have
been employed with the Statutory Corporations like
the Housing Authority who have come to us with this


provision, where they have been working for as long
as 9 3/4 years and theyhave reachedthe age of sixty
years just before theyhave completed ten years' ser-
vice and they are not eligible for pensions. As I un-
derstand it, Sir, the Casual Employees Pension Act
applies to them, so that when the Act says "in the
service of the Government", I hope that it does not
mean only the Central Government, but also the
Statutory Agencies and that these people will come
within it.

The question that this Resolution do now pass was put
and resolved in the affirmative without division.

COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY

Hon. C. E. TALMA: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move
that Your Honour do now leave the Chair, and the
House go into Committee of Supply, and that it be an
instruction of the House while in Committee of Supply,
to deal with the Resolutions of which notice has just
been given.

Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE 1967-68 No.37

HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORT OVERTIME

A Resolution for the sum of $4,034 was called.

Hon. N. W. BOXILL: Mr. Chairman, first of all,
I must thank hon. members on the other side for be-
ing so generous this afternoon. It may be that the
Yuletide spirit is prevailing in the House today and
we thank hon. members on the other side very much
for allowing us to get through with this Resolution.
I do not like to come down to the House with these
money Resolutions and push them in the hands of hon.
members just a few minutes before we deal with them,
but hon. members will understand that we really have
no control over some things, especially in this case.
Hen. members have already been circularised with
copies of this Resolution. They will see that it is for
overtime pay which arose out of the abnormal situa-
tion which took place when we were paying out the
backpay from last year, and so on. I do not want to
bore hon. members with a long recitation of what took
place and of what is to take place.
4.00 p.m.

I beg to move that this Resolution do now pass.

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: I beg to second that.

Mr. HINDS: I just want to ask the Minister for
the assurance that none of the overtime money be-
came necessary consequent upon the Accountant
being engaged with certain investigations which
touched on work on what is called the Treasury Build-
ing; in other words, that the Accountant did not have to
work overtime consequent upon certain investigations
that were carried on in this connection because, as


_ __________







1001
,, ,-


Syou know, the Government has decided to award cer-
tain works by contract; we just want to know that
nothing was done involving the payment of overtime
monies to Accountants or anybody and that no such
sum was included in this $4,034 beingnowasked for.
That is all we want to know.

Hon. N. W. BOXILL: Mr. Chairman, I really do
not think the hon. junior member for St. Peter ex-
pects me to answer this because Iwouldnot know the
question of overtime work or otherwise. I do not think
that he is really serious.

The question that the Resolution do nowpass was put
and resolved in the affirmative without division.

SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE 1967-68 No.35

Hon. N. W. BOXILL: Mr. Chairman, I know that
the hon. senior member for St. Joseph will be in his
glee since he has been agitating for some time about
this matter; but I want to assure him that it was no
indifference on the part of the Ministry or the Gov-
ernment. Since we have been accused especially
my Ministry has been accused, of even wasting the
taxpayers' money in the way people work, starting
bridges and then having to stop them and since we
want, when we start to do something to see that we
have plans and we are doing it well, the matter has
been given careful study and has taken some time.

Here is a list of what we intend to do on this
occasion. I am sorry that we do nothave time to cir-
cularise members with the list, but this sum of
$91,145 it is to carry us through from now until the
end of the financial year. This money is only to give
us a start. We do not want to vote the entire amount
now. The necessary amount would be somewhere in
the vicinity of approximately $400,000 and it would be
silly for me to come inhere inthe middle of Decem-
ber and ask us to vote $400,000 to spend between now
and the 31st March, 1968.The only waythat we would
be able to spend it is if they lend me some of it and
that is not going to happen. Therefore, we are asking
for $91,145 that would carryus throughfromnow un-
til 31st March next year.

It is for two good reasons. One is to allay the
fears of the hon. junior member for St. Joseph and
also the hon. senior member for St. Andrew, and in
order to find work for the people so that some people
would be able to get their Christmas berry, and some
people may be able to get a loan too.

The matter for consideration is a request for
supplementary provision of the sum of $91,145 under
Head 38, Item 26 and Item 49. The areas to be fixed
are as follows:-

Horse Hill, St. Joseph. We are building a retain-
ing wall which would cost $5,250.32.

Mellowes,.St. Joseph;
Trio Path and Friendship;

Highway 2, St. Andrew. This is for piling, bridg-
ing, re-instatement.


Spring Vale, St. Andrew.
Foster Hall, St. Joseph. This is another place
which my friend is always agitating about.

Highway 2, near the Rocklyn Bus Company.
Whitehill, St. Andrew.
King's Street, St. Simons, St. Andrew.
Rock Hall
Rock Hall, St. Andrew. My colleague is always
giving me a little prod in my side about this.

Boscobelle, St. Andrew.
Parks Road, St. Joseph.
Melvin Hill to Dark Hole, St. Joseph.
Richmond, St. Joseph.
Road from Freizers Plantation House to River.

Coggins Bridge, St. Andrew. Now, the Estimate
for this Bridge is $43,782, but Imust tell members of
the House that the bridge when completed is going to
cost us in the vicinity of $105,000. The reason why
we did not start the bridge, as members thought we
should have started, was because we did not have
proper plans at the outset. We had to make sure that
there was stability in the area, and we are making a
first class bridge now. When you are spending
$105,000 of the taxpayers's money, you know that this
is a lot of money.

I will also like to say to the hon. senior member
for St. Joseph that I hope this would be the last I
would hear of him of things being done in St. Joseph,
because more money is spent in St. Joseph and St.
Andrew from my Ministry than in any other part of
the Island. It sounds strange but it is true. A lot of
money is spent down there. You have the Soil Con-
servation Scheme on which we are spending a quarter
m:llon dollars.

Everybody is getting their pump stroke except
me. I have to get a stroking off my pump too; so I
hope when I come in here to do something in St.
Thomas I will not hear somebody getting up on the
opposite side and criticising me for it because I have
done work all over the island.

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: Mr. Chairman, on a
point of order. The Soil Conservation Scheme comes
under the Ministry of Agriculture not the Ministry
of Communications. Three quarter million dollars
is spent on that scheme by the Ministry of Agricul-
ture.

Hon. N. W. BOXILL: I knowthat; but I am saying
that the most money from the Government is spent
down there. I did not say from my Ministry. I said
the Government is spending in St. Andrew and St.
Joseph the most money.



I can see the senior member for St. Joseph rock-
ing back like a lord now that he has something done.
As regards the bridge, we are planning to build a
cement wall running right along and going straight
to the end in order to checkthe erosion that is taking
place from the river running through there.







1002


Therefore, we are doing a proper job; so if we
are taking a little bit longer than you expect, that is
no reason for you to believe that it was because of
any indifference or because we of the Democratic La-
bour Party were not supported from St. Joseph. We
realise that the people in St. Joseph happen to be Bar-
badians too, and some day we are sure, may be
when you are gone, they will do the right thing.

I beg to move that the Resolution do now pass.

Hon. C. E. TALMA: I beg to second that.

Mr. CHAIRMAN: The question is......

Mr. SMITH: Mr. Chairman, I thought you were
still hearing the name of the senior member for St.
Joseph being called in this Resolution. They were
calling me out; so I have to answer the call. Well,
Sir, it is better late than never. Since you have re-
ferred to me now, I just only want to draw this to your
attention.

You said "Horse Hill, but there is a road there
which we call Church Village Road. I do not know if it
is that road which you mean. It has a big drop. I do not
know if you mean that road and you are calling it
"Horse Hill." That is one road that the people cannot
pass at all.

(A VOICE: Yes.)

If it is that, it is O.K. I only want to draw it to
your attention. Another one is Fruitful Hill. I did not
hear that name called. That is worse. You will re-
member, Sir, the place I took you when you had to
crawl on your belly. It is agoodthing that you have a
good belly and something good inside there.

Hon. N. W. BOXILL: Mr. Chairman, Ididnot call
all the names that I have here. I did not want to bore
you. That is what I said at first. I called those that I
knew you were agitating most about. We intend to do a
complete job.

Mr. SMITH: Now that you are working on all, I
want you to make sure, if it is not there on your list,
that that road must be done before the reaping season
begins because it is an outlet from St. Joseph to St.
Andrew and canes grow both down and up the hill.
4.10 p.m.

Now that we are giving the green light for the
money to be spent, this is another appeal to start on
Coggins Bridge, Fruitful Hill and Church Village at
the same time. You cannot afford to leave back any,
and say: "This gang is to go here" when it finishes.
Start on all because this is the month of December
and you will be able to catchup before the Christmas
season is over and the reaping season is on you.
Press all the unemployed up there who were suffer-
ing for the last two or three months into work, and
have a gang at Church Village, one at Fruitful Hill
and one at Coggins Hill and let us get things working
right and fix them right.


Hon.N. W. BOXILL: Before you put the question
Mr. Chairman, I should like to say to the hon. mem-
ber that the reasons why we could not start all these
projects as rapidly as we would like are two. We do
not have the mechanical skill, that is, qualified en-
gineers to look after these jobs, andthe next thing is
the supervisory staff. Once we have the supervisory
staff, there would be no problem. We will start as
many as possible, especially those roads whichpeo-
ple use in carrying their canes to the estates.

Mr. SMITH: I know that supervision will be a
problem, but I can tell you of a first-class supervisor
who has just resigned, who built Coggins Bridge and
knows bridges backwards. His name is George
Downes. Bring him back in for two or three months
and you do not want an imported engineer at all. We
bring back in big shots sometimes and put them back
in jobs after they have resigned; so you can bring
back George Downes and put him on at Coggins Bridge
Fruitful Hill or somewhere. He is a first-class super-
visor, a man who knows the job, and he will be
cheaper than an importee. Bring him back into the
job and let us work fast.

Mr. HINDS: Mr. Chairman, with regard to this
sum of $91,145 to meet expenditure on repairs to
roadways and bridges, I am to wonder if the canalis-
ing of the Salt Pond at Speightstown which is going to
be bound up with work on the Speightstown bridge is
included in this.

Hon. N. W. BOXILL: Mr. Chairman, to allay the
fears of the hon. junior member for St. Peter, I am
not completely surprised, but I thought the work on
the Salt Pond had been started. The hon. member
probably would know that I was out of the Island on
Thursday and returned on Sunday night, but maybe
he has not visited his constituency recently. If the
actual work has not been started, lam sure it will be
started this week or not later than next week.

Mr. HINDS: That is all we wanted to hear.

The question that the Resolution do now pass,was put
and resolved in the affirmative without division.


On motion of Hon. C. E. TALMA, seconded by Hon.A.
DaC. EDYARDS, Mr. CHAIRMAN reported the passing of
two Resolutions in Committee of Supply, and Mr.
SPEAKER resumed the Chair and reported accordingly.

On separate motions of Hon. C. E. TALMA, seconded
in each case by Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS, the Resolutions
were read a frist and second time and agreed to.

RESOLUTION TO AMEND THE RATES
OF POSTAGE ON PARCELS

Hon. N. W. BOXILL: Mr. Speaker, Ibegto move
that Order No. 6 be the next Order of the Day.

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: I beg to second that.








1003


The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.

Hon. N. W. BOXILL: Mr. Speaker, hon. members
would be aware that by Resolution No. 41/1967 the
rates for surface parcel post to the U.K were in-
creased with effect from 1st July, 1967 in an effort
to remove the debit balance under the Post Office
Revenue Item No. 2 Net Credit on Overseas Parcel
Post which resulted from the increase in the United
Kingdom Terminal Charges. The debit balance has
been reduced but not entirely removed.

The Government has been notified that the Postal
Administration of Canada proposes to increase its
Terminal Charges with effect from 1st January,1968.

This Resolution therefore provides for an in-
crease in the rates of Surface Parcel Post to Canada
(direct) and via Trinidad with effect from 1st January,
1968 in order to avoid a further increase in the debit
balance under the above Revenue item.
4.20 p.m.

As hon, members, who have a copy will note,
2 Ibs. will cost 854; 3 Ibs. will cost 850; 7 Ibs. will
cost $2.15; 11 Ibs will cost $3.80, and 22 lbs. will cost
$7.75. There is a strange thing that Iwould like to say
for the benefit of hon. members. A number of people
seem to think that you can post 22 lbs. of weight to
Canada, but this is not so. You can only post no more
than 20 lbs. I beg to move that this Resolution do now
pass.

Mr. LOWE: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.

RATE OF INTEREST (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1967

Hon. C. E. TALMA: Mr. Speaker, atthis stage, I
think we should resume consideration of the Bill in
connection with the Rate of Interest Act.

Mr. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I do not know if I will
be in order. I cannot speak on this matter because I
have already spoken on it. Will I be in order to speak
on this motion, Sir? I think it is time for us to go
home and have a spree until next month. We have no
right remaining here any longer. I think we should
leave off the work and go home and start to celebrate
from tonight. I have finished working now.

Mr. SPEAKER: Actually the hon. member didn't
make a motion.

Mr. SMITH: Letus get it clear. We are not work-
ing any more; we are going on a spree now.

Mr. MOTTLEY: Mr Speaker, I am not speaking,
I am inquiring -

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. member is not speaking;
therefore I cannot hear him.


Mr. MOTTLEY: That shows what a joyous mood
you are in. I am wondering, Sir, havingheard a ruling
quite recently, that if a member who had been speak-
ing on a Bill before the House is not present that that
Bill......

Mr. SPEAKER: I take it that the hon. member
does not have Order No. 2 on the Order Paper.

ACQUISITION OF LAND AT SAND STREET
Hon. C. E. TALMA: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move

that Item No. 5 on the Order Paper be the next Order
of the Day.

Hon. N. W. BOXILL: I beg to second that.
The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.
Mr. SPEAKER: Accordingly Order No. 5 is the
instant Order of the Day, and that Order stands in the
name of the Hon. Leader of the House, the hon. junior
member for St. Lucy, who, through his indisposition,
is not in his seat today.

Hon. C. E. TALMA: Mr. Speaker, Iam asking for
leave to deal with this Resolution in the absence of
the Hon. Leader of the House.

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. member for Christ
Church is asking leave of the House to deal with
Item No. 5, which stands in the name of the hon.
junior member for St. Lucy, and if there is no ob-
jection, leave will be granted. Hearing no objection,
I declare leave to be granted, and the hon. member
may proceed to move the passing of a Resolution to
approve the compulsory acquisition by the Crown in
right of its Government under the provisions of the
Land Acquisition Act, 1949 of parcels of land together
with buildings and erections which forms the Schedule
to this Resolution.

Hon. C. E. TALMA: Mr. Speaker, as hon.mem-
bers will recall, there is a strip of land at Sand
Street, Speightstown, which is suffering from erosion
in that the sea has encroached, and this strip of land
in question comprises 10 lots in an area that is badly
eroded. It had 8 dwellinghouses on the land, but most
of these houses have been re-sited and the owners
or tenants have been re-housed elsewhere.

It is necessary to have this land acquired, and,
in order to have it done as expeditiously as possible,
the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act 1949 are
being invoked in order to secure a good and mar-
ketable title, as in many cases the titles are de-
fective. The parcels of land involved and the des-
cription is "All those certain pieces or parcels of
land situate at Sand Street in the parish of Saint Peter
in this Island together containing by admeasurement
12,130 square feet or thereabouts and abutting and
bounding on lands of J. Kidd, on the Sea, on lands of
A. Skinner, deceased, and on the Public Road known
as Highway I, or however else the same may abut and
bound together with the wall buildings thereon.







1004


The Government is acquiring this land com-
pulsorily in order to make certain improvements
and to put up a groin in that area to protect the road
and to protect the area generally. I beg to move that
this Resolution do now pass.

Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON: I beg to second that.

Mr. HINDS: Mr. Speaker, this eroded land in
Sand Street, Speightstown, formerly housed some 10
families, but what has been the cause for consider-
able concern is the fact that the Housing Authority
seems to have allowed its good offices to be prosti-
tuted by supporters of the Democratic Labour Party
in Speightstown.
4.30 p.m.

That is, they opened a tenantry at Church Street
Gardens and you will find that known supporters of
the Democratic Labour Party at Sand Street have been
able to use the land of the Housing Authority at
Church Street Gardens to set up houses, not that they
have been in the eroded area, but they have taken
their houses from where they had them before and
they were those who knew that these people at Sand
Street would have been at the mercies of this Reso-
lution which is now before the House. We would agree
that one object of this Resolution is to give a good
and marketable title to some of the land in the area
concerned. What has happened is this; these agents
of the Government have been able to make some
money for themselves by preying on the lamentable
situation in which those people who lived in the
eroded areas were placed. You will findthat it is not
a case where the Government, which is nowtrying to
acquire this area of land, has seen to it that the peo -
ple who were in this dangerous area were first served
in the new Church Street Gardens. Not at all; Sir,
friends of the Government Party were first served.
It borders on the scandalous to know what really went
on. It is for this reason that we have got to subject the
Minister to certain searching questions on this whole
matter. At the present moment one house that remains
is partly wall and partly wood and the Government,
we understand, has attempted to make a deal for less
than $700 for the house and land. Why is this? It is
known throughout Speightstown and St. Peter that a
mother and daughter who live in this particular house
have been supporters of the Barbados Labour Party in
Speightstown, so what do you find? At the last mo-
ment this house still remains and at every attempt
by the occupiers to get word from the Government as
to finality as to price and what not they are being
turned and twisted about, from one week to another.
At the same time, people who live on the other side of
Sand Street, the Government's agents, have been al-
lowed to go into Church Street Gardens and set up all
sorts of houses up there, and they were renting them
out and making money; but these people who are
threatened by the sea -andyou know, Sir, that during
the past week with the rough seas around the West
Coast, one can imagine the plight of these people. It
is a small area of land; it is Just 12,130 square feet
but nevertheless the people have been living there, I
should say, in comparative peace, if not in comfort.
So what you will find is this,that the Government has


been reluctant in reaching reasonable conclusions
with some of these people hence the necessity for
this Resolution here today.

In a matter of this sort, the Government's policy
should have been the same thing which applies to the
plantation owner, the big property owner. Whatever it
may be, it should have applied in this particular case
without favour to any particular individual or without
creating any undue hardship on any individual for
political reasons. It is a very shameful thing, and I
am sure that the Hon. Minister, knowinghim as I do,
would be glad to know that, with the passing of this
Resolution this afternoon, all matters in connection
with this plot of land at Sand Street and the settling of
it, are carried out or are gone through with con-
summate ease, and we are confident that the Minister
will spare no pains, at this stage, in telling us the
names of the various persons who own this plot of
land which goes to make up this 12,130 square feet,
and what agreements have been entered into so far
and what is the true position in regard to the two
houses which now remain in the same area.

Hon. E. W. BOXILL: Mr. Speaker, I honestly do
not like people who try to mislead others and de-
liberately at that. Now, Sir, speaking of this land at
Sand Street, the last hon. member who has just sat
down, spoke of some Party man who was allowed to do
this and who was allowed to do that and the other.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Iwould give
this House exactly what took place. It is very grati-
fying to hear that this lady of whom the hon. junior
member for St. Peter spoke, whose name is Mrs.
Rochester, supported him.
4.40 p.m.

I am glad to hear that, but the hon. member did
not say that Mrs. Rochester -he said Mrs. Rochester
and her daughter Mrs. Rochester also has a son
who is deaf and a little mentally retarded, but the
same Minister of Health has gone out of his way to
get medical aid for this child; so it is proved con-
clusively that the Minister of Health has helped this
child.

This lady had supported the Barbados Labour
Party; and yet a candidate of the Democratic Labour
Party, the Minister of Health, has gone out of his way
to help Mrs. Rochester's son. The junior member for
St. Peter is talking about the lady; he does not know
that I travel and I know things. Now, this Mrs.
Rochester's husband left here about twelve or thir-
teen years ago and went to England. He has not written
back.

We did all that was in our power to get Mrs.
Rochester to occupy one of the houses in Church
Street. At first, we went further out, but then she
said it was too far. I agree that she did not want to
go there. We had some land which was near to us at
Forde's pasture but the lady was adamant. Politics
has absolutely nothing to do with it as far as I know.
Maybe, the junior member for St. Peter brought poli-
tics in it by telling Mrs. Rochester not to move. He
has told this House that this lady lives in a boarded







1005


and shingled house, part wall and part board. Any-
body who goes down St. Peter canlookto the left and
see it. It is the only house that is standing on the left
hand side now because I think the one in which the
sick man lived has been removed; but this house in
which Mrs. Rochester lives is nothing more than a
hovel.

The sand, the sea andeverything comes upto the
back part of the house. Of course,that is no house at
all. It is only just a little part of the wall in which she
can reside, and in my opinion the wall really was
something built, maybe, in the fifteenth or sixteenth
century because it is one of these plastered things.
It is a rubble wall place. The place is absolutely un-
inhabitable; so when the hon. member stands up in
here to give the impression that Mr. Mascoll, the per-
son who went to move this house over to the other
site I know all about this these people refused to
allow Mr. Mascoll to remove the house and said that
they will remove it themselves. Furthermore, the
land that these people are livingon -most of the land
belongs to a lady named Mrs. Skinner who lives
somewhere up Worthing. Furthermore, Mr. Mascoll
had offered to remove the houses far cheaper than
anybody else who had offered to remove these houses.
This has absolutely nothing to do with politics, but be -
cause everybody did not support the junior member
for St. Peter, he has come in here and has talked as
he did and thinks that he is getting away with it. He
came in here to castigate Mr. Mascoll.

Mr. HINDS: On a point of order, Sir. Enough
people supported the junior member for St. Peter for
the junior member for St. Peter to be a member of
this House. There is nothing to worry about.

Mr. SPEAKER: What I am worried about is that
it is not a point of order.

Hon. N. W. BOXILL: What I am trying to say is
that because the junior member for St. Peter knew
that Mr. Mascoll supported us and Mr. Mascoll
is a qualified carpenter the junior member for St.
Peter has come in here to think that he can castigate
Mr. Mascoll. It is somewhat tantamount to something
that went on in another land problem when I men-
tioned about someone living in Christ Church, and
the senior member for Christ Church thought that
he was in a Law Court, and because I said a quarter
acre, or half acre and an eight and the other Minis-
ter said something, the senior member for Christ
Church got up thinking that was a point. That may
have been a point in the Law Court, but is not any-
thing in here. I could have said that it was a mile of
land and you would have to accept it. That does not
matter. However, Ido not want hon. members to come
into this Chamber and mislead the Chamber by giving
the impression that this Government is doing anything
underhand. What he did was above board.

These people refused to allow Mr. Mascoll to
remove their houses. They removed them themselves
and they are quite satisfied. Furthermore, Mrs.
Rochester, the lady that the hon. Junior member for
St. Pctcr said supported him as well as her daughter


has bluntly refused to move. The only place in the
world where I know that one person can hold up a
Government's project is here in Barbados. It does not
happen any other part of the world.

The land that the hon. member is talking about,
he said just now that it was about 1,200 square feet of
land. It is 730 square feet not enough to put a big
penny stamp on. Furthermore, the sea is encroaching
where this lady is holding up the progress of the
country repeatedly, and if the junior member for St.
Peter does not go down there this evening and tell
Mrs. Rochester to try and get out, one morning he is
going to lose two votes. Do not say that I did not warn
him. He is going to find that two votes have gone
through the eddoes.

I am just trying to give the House a true picture
of what took place. There is absolutely no politics in-
volved in it. It was only that we saw the sea encroach-
ing on the land that part of the land in Speightstown,
and we decided to buy a strip of land elsewhere. It is
just a strip of land; it is not beach land that the Gov-
ernment is trying to rob anybody out of or anything
like that because you really cannot get a bath there at
all. We are just attemptingto save Speightstown from
meeting up somewhere bythe Police post. Therefore,
I am appealing to the junior member for St. Peter
to see Mrs. Rochester and her daughter his sup-
porters and tell them to get out of this House be-
fore he finds out that he will lose two votes because
I am sure by the time the sea starts to get rough at
that end, what is left of the House would be gone and
she would have absolutely nothing to which she can
hold on.

Now is a good time for her to go when we are
providing somewhere for her to go and live, but do
not come into the House and try to give this House
the impression that this Government has done some-
thing underhand. Mr. Speaker, I was saying that it
appears to me that, after these people have cast their
vote in favour of the junior member for St. Peter now
they have some sort of remorse setting in and they
are attempting suicide because they have refused to
come out. When some person knows that danger is
there and deliberately walks into danger, it is suicide,
but the only trouble is that we do not have the power
to charge them for premeditated suicide; so maybe,
after we find that the sea has come in, we may be
able to charge them for attempting suicide,provided
that they are living. I just warn the hon. member to
help us to help himself.

Mr. HINDS: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order.
I understand the hon. member to say that the people
who live in this house are the people who are bringing
in the sea, or that they bring in the sea to commit
suicide?


Hon. N. W. BOXILL: No, Mr. Speaker, I did not
mean that they are bringing in the sea.


Mr. SPEAKER: The point is that that is not a
point of order.







1006


Hon. N. W. BOXILL: Alright, I accept that's an.
answer too. I do not mind their bringing in the sea;
I mind that they are preventing us from carrying
those bulldozers down there to drop piles to push the
sea back, and through their selfishness, if you do not
go and ask them to move, it would mean that you
would have no more Speightstown and that the people
in St. Lucy would be cut off from Speightstown. If
that is what you want, well, that is alright with me,
but Government is being retarded in its programme
because of misguided politicians. That is all Ihave to
say on that matter, but I would just like, before I sit
down, to ask the hon. junior member for St. Peter
since for the whole day the spirit of Yuletide has been
evident in here, to let it permeate for the entire
sitting.
4.50 p.m.

Hon. C. E. TALMA: Mr. Speaker, I want to give
some information which the hon. junior member for
St. Peter requested. In the first place Iwant to assure
him that in employing a private contractor, certain
savings were effected, and the job was very much
cheaper than if it had been done by the Housing Au-
thority. The various parcels of land and their re-
spective owners and areas are as follows:-


Dr. Sugarman

D. Jones
A. Harris

A. Holder


J. Rochester

Mrs. Esme E.
Atherley

E. Worrell

K. Jordan
Mr. Branch

S. Fenty


3,670 square feet of land
and dwelling house;
730 square feet of land;
960 square feet of land
and dwelling house;
1,240 square feet of land
and dwelling house and
shop;
730 square feet of land
and dwelling house;

515 square feet of land
and dwelling house;
675 square feet of land
and dwelling house;
2,210 square feet of land;
640 square feet of land
and dwelling house;
760 square feet of land
and dwelling house.


You will observe, Mr. Speaker, that in every case
save three, the area of land in question is under the
area as prescribed and allowed by the Town and
Country Planning (Interim Control) Act. In other
words, only in the case of Dr. Sugarman where you
have 3,670 square feet of land, in the case of A.
Holder with 1,240 square feet and in the case of K.
Jordan with 2,210 square feet do the provisions of
the Public Health Act seem to be provided for. The
other areas are very small and the whole point is
that savings were effected, the people are sited in
safety and there is better provision by way of toilet
arrangements and other sanitary arrangements,
playingfield and so on. In other words, they should be
more comfortable for this season thantheyhave been
for quite some time, and there is no danger involved
where they are living and sited.


As far as the political end is concerned, I do not
care to get mixed up in it. I do not see it serves any
useful purpose; but we had been experiencing great
difficulty in having people to agree to be rested for
their own benefit and advantage.

The question that the Resolution do now pass was put
and resolved in the affirmative without division.

Mr. SPEAKER: Would the Hon. Acting Leader of
the House intimate what, if anything, it is proposed
further to proceed with?

Hon. C. E. TALMA: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move
that Order No. 2, the Rate of Interest Bill which was
being debated earlier be the next Order of the Day.

Hon. G. G. FEdGUSSON: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative,
the House dividing as follows:

AYES: Mr. YEARWOOD: Hon. C. E. TALMA;
Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON; Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS;
Hon. N. W. BOXILL; Mr. LOWE; Mr. SPRINGER;
Mr. WEEKS; Mr. HOPPIN; Mr. LYNCH; Mr.
MOTTLEY 11.

NOES: Mr. HINDS 1.

HOUSE RESUMES DEBATE ON THE RATE OF
INTEREST (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1967

Mr. SPEAKER: Order No. 2 becomes the next
Order of the Day, and when this matter was previously
being discussed, the hon. junior member for St. Peter
was speaking. He may, if he thinks fit, resume.

Mr. HINDS: Mr. Speaker, there is one point I
should like to draw to the attention of this House in
connection with this Bill, and it is this. We must
bear in mind that when Solicitors for instance, lend
out money, they do not lend out the firm's money.
Solicitors lend out the money of their clients; so what
we are fighting in a Bill of this nature is that Solici-
tors will have to continue, so to speak, doing the
same business as those licensed money lenders, but
the Solicitors will only be able to charge 8 per cent,
but the licensed firms will be able to lend at an in-
terest rate greater than 8 per cent.

Now, Sir, this Bill can have very dangerous pro-
portions. There are no two ways about that.
5.00 p.m.

While this Hon. House is debating it, no one -
except the Minister of Finance, perhaps has any
idea of what interest will be allowed to be charged
by any firm, by any bank or any other body that might
be licensed from time to time. We are sure, having
listened to the Minister of Finance, that he has found
himself on one other occasion being unable to make
out a case which we feel would convince even his own
Ministers and back benchers as to the necessity for
interfering with this very dangerous weapon, this







1007


matter of increasing the rate of interest, or making
it possible for certain firms, bodies and corporations
to lend out money at an interest rate greater than 8%.

Sir, the objects and Reasons tell us that we have
had the protection of a Rate of Interest Act since
1754. We have heard here from the hon. senior mem-
ber for St. Thomas enough of what went on which
brought about a change from time to time. If hon.
members would look back at this matter of the rate
of interest they would see that there is nothing for
that matter, even the urgency that was in this Bill
has disappeared; so all of this rush, this fluster, this
sweating and generating of heat that went on, all of
that has now died down and we believe that hon. mem-
bers are now in a better position to weigh matters
carefully, to think carefully, and see for themselves
whether or not this is a dangerous bit of legislation
with which this Hon. House is dealing at this moment.

The Hon. Prime Minister tells us that he has no
A
list or, perhaps, names of firms, or bodies of per-
sons, that will be licensed when this Bill becomes
law. That might be true, but that is not our main
concern in this House. We firmly believe that the best
road for a Bill of this sort is that along which the hon.
senior member for Christ Church has sought to direct
us: that the Bill be sent to a Select Committee. You
will agree, Sir, that, as has been said before, this is
a question of money and understand, Sir big
money. This Hon. House has had before it already
the case where a firm, just merely tryingto find out
where money could be got, in one swoop came off to
$135,000.

The Minister of Finance knew all about it, and he
agreed to the paying of $135,000 just for getting money
for nothing. Now $135,000 is money in any of these
Caribbean Islands. If, therefore, these firms, these
banks, these bodies -that $135,000 was secured with-
out having this licence to lend. These moneylenders
are going to be dealing in millions, and the rake-off -
what will drop by the side of the table will be enough
for somebody to get rich from a Bill of this sort.
There would be no question of paying for a licence,
but what will drop from the master's table will be
enough to satisfy, perhaps, even some politicians.
Even a politician will get enough from the licensing
or other transactions from which he would be happy
for the rest of his life, after this Bill becomes law.
This is what we have to arm ourselves against and
guard against.

That is why it becomes necessary for us to get
the big financial brains that we have knocking about
- all of these bank officials who know about big fi-
nance to put their brains against the brains of our
economist, the Minister of Finance. In a Select Com-
mittee a lot that is not now given to this Hon. House
can be brought out. We feel that the business com-
munity, the banks and these firms that will be in-
terested in this licence for money-lending would
all come forward and state their claims and enable
the Committee to arrive at a decision which could be
couched in respectful language and presented to this
Hon. House for its guidance in a matter of this sort.


To my mind, Sir, whether the British k had been
devalued or not, the Minister of Finance would have
come before this Hon. House with this Bill, but it so
happens that he sought to seize upon an opportunity -
he acted as an opportunist, so to speak. I am con-
vinced that there are some things which, I think, he
should not allow himself to become confused over.
We on this side of the House know very, very well
indeed that the Minister of Finance would offer every
objection possible to this Bill being sent to a Select
Committee.
5.10 p.m.

The reason for that is clear, but we can only
hope that an opportunity will be given for each and
everyone in this Hon. House to be given of the benefit
of all the financial brains in this country before this
Bill is passed or rejected by this Hon. House. I beg
to move that this Bill be sent to a Select Com nittee.
(ASIDES)

Mr. SPEAKER: That can only be done after the
second reading has been passed.

Mr. MOTTLEY: Mr. Speaker, it is generally felt,
that unless you have an opportunity to get some piece
of paper to be called an economist, that you cannot
speak on a matter of this sort. Consider this a very
important matter, and despite what anyone may think,
I feel quite confident from my experience to speak on
this Bill. Dealing with the Usury Act which was once
amended here, I think I said then, and all will agree,
that it was one of the oldest Acts in this country and
it served the country well. Up to a few years ago, I
think the Dominion of Canada had a similar Act. I
have been discussing this matter with persons who
have had some experience in dealing with this matter.
When we amended the Usury Act on the last occasion,
we amended it for a specific reason at that time. The
reason then was that the Development Corporation,
I think it was, was the only person competent to lend
money for development. The Electric Company could
not bring in money at six per cent and go through all
the usual expenses, and so on. We saw reason be-
cause we wanted to have the Electric Supply Cor-
poration developed, and all of us agreed at that time.
Now comes the amendment which we have been told
has come about mainly from the devaluation of the
k.. I am one of those people who would like to see this
Bill go to a Select Committee because of the fact that
the Prime Minister has made a speech on the matter,
and he is somewhat worried about what you are going
to give to the various banks, corporate bodies, etc.
We must take things as they appear to be in this
Island. People in this country who have to borrow
money, borrow it from their Solicitors. With a few
exceptions, the Solicitors never have money to lend
out, but they lend out their clients' money, and this
money is loaned out in keeping with the Usury Act. I
can remember only two cases of usury. I cannot
charge more than six per cent; I have seen money
which was very hard to get. I have seen money being
loaned out at four and half per cent. I have seen,
even when we were willing to pay six' per cent you
could not get the money. Now we are passing through
a time which I myself am very worried about, as to


1







1008


whether this Bill could not be further amended to
allow money to be loaned out or borrowed at higher
than eight per cent. It is for this reason. It is true
that we read and heard and; know that the bank rate in
England has gone up to eight per cent. There has been
some talk about banks having to get money in here to
be able to lend it out, and therefore they cannot get
it in to lend it out in the same way. Let us disabuse
our minds of that. On the other hand, as I have said,
Solicitors do lend out money. Although I say this
with some authority money is loaned out and the rate
can be eight per cent, some firms have been known
to lend out money still at six per cent. Money is
usually loaned with a defeasance of three to five
years, and I am in a position to say that the people
who lend out money, although the Act then has been
amended to eight per cent, have allowed their loans
to remain at six per cent.

What I am worried about is that within recent
years all the banks in this country have started Trus -
tee Departments. I think that you are well aware of
that. If we amend this Act, I do not see the Prime
Minister granting permission to Solicitors to lend out
money at ten per cent, but I do see the argument ad-
duced by bankers to ask to loan money at ten per cent.
There is a practice in this country by banks when
they advance money for business, for people who
import cloth, or for ninety days to pay for these at
the commercial rate of seven and one half per cent.
Here and there you will find that where they are big
business people, the rate might even come down to
seven per cent.

I should like to draw this to the attention of hon.
members. Do they think that some well-to-do firms
in this country take their money and pay for goods at
all? This is done through the banks and the rate of
interest is charged. If the rate of interest is seven
and a half per cent commercial rate, because the
Usury Act prevents you from lending out money at
more than eight per cent, I am worried somewhat
that if we amend this Act and carry the rate to ten
per cent, that is going to stop those persons respon-
sible for lending money from lending it at the com-
mercial rate of nine and a half per cent. Can you not
see a company or firm buying, say, a shipment of
meal, milk or flour and that 1/2per cent more may be
$300,000 which is bound to be placed on the consumer.
5.20 p.m,

That in itself will carry the cost of living up. I
think myself that a very good case would have to be
made out for me to support this Bill without its going
to Select Committee. Now, on the other hand, I want
this to be borne in mind. I have heard it mentioned,
and the fears of hon. members were allayed, that it
is a question of not giving this to the Solicitors or
that somebody has the right to lend at ten per cent.
What is going to happen is this. If one has to lend
$100,000, $200,000, $600,000, or $10,000,000, what is
easier for me to do? Not at allto go to a Solicitor be-
caqse he can only lend at eight per cent the maxi-
mum he can lend at is eight per cent because he is
not getting in this Act the permission from the Min-
ister of Finance to lend it out at a percentage greater


than eight per cent. But you can put it into a bank
which can get that permission, and which has got a
Trust Company. You can put it there and lend it at
eight or eight and a half per cent. They can even
lend it out at ten per cent.

As it stands now today, the banks in Bridgetown
have trust funds which they lend out here. That is why
I believe myself there is a certain amount of fixed
deposits, then they have a certain amount of trust
funds which they lend out at six per cent, or six and
one-half per cent and they make one and one-half
per cent in turn like that.

That is why I believe myself that a matter of
this sort should go to Select Committee where, not
only the Minister of Finance, but other persons deal-
ing with finance would be able to meet and be satis -
fled that no undue hardship or burden would be placed
on anyone. What I fear, Sir, as I said, is that I know of
money loaned in this country by a few persons and
the insurance companies, and if you give the insur-
ance companies the right to lend money at a higher
rate than eight per cent, do you know what it would
mean to those persons who have just built up these
various developments and houses, and so on, and who
still got mortgages on theirproperty? They knewthat
they need not be any fear; so long as they continued
to pay the interest nobodywouldinterfere; but since
you can get interest instead of 6 1/2 per cent, or 7
per cent,you canget 8 1V/2per cent or 10 per cent, do
you know what is going to be the position?

I fear the question of insurance companies and
banks being given this right. Obviously, insurance
companies are going to raise their rates. Obviously,
despite all the money that you have been paying to-
wards the loan for probably five years, they are going
to come right in and close it and they are going to
raise on it. They are not going to tell you that you
have to pay them off; they are going to raise it.

Then, as to the question of the banks, they are
going to raise it. People are not going to put money
into the hands of Solicitors at all; they are going to
put it, as itnowhappens, into the hands of the Trust
department of the various banks for lending it. I feel,
Mr. Speaker, that I have good reasons why I voted on
the last occasion for amending one of the oldest Acts
in this country that of the Usury Act from six to
eight per cent, because it was pointed out and the
reason made clear. I have seen since -and I am in a
position to say this that money is still loaned out -
up to last month by a leading insurance company in
this country, although the rate is eight per cent, at a
rate less than that. They always take into considera-
tion the personality, the job, the various surrounding
circumstances of the borrower and they would still
lend you at seven per cent.

You hear this stupid argument being used about
the bank rate in England going to eight per cent, and
therefore,,they cannot borrow money to come inhere
and lend it at eight per cent. What about all these de-
posits being made and the like? You would always
hear this about banks; when the rates come down,the







1009


rates of interest come down, but when the Bank of
England rate goes up, the interest on deposits never
goes up.

Mr. Speaker, it is my considered opinion -and
I would like to see that this Bill go to Select Com-
mittee where the Minister of Finance can sit down
and give us in greater detail something that would
ensure us that it would not unnecessarily increase
the cost of living. Mark you this. There are people
who may have half million dollars of their own in
this country, but they do not take it up so long as
they can get things on consignment, and they know
that the consignment of goods that they have is al-
ready sold in Roebuck Street or Tudor Street or
among the shopkeepers themselves.

All of this must be passed to the consumer. If
this goes from 7 1/2 per cent, as is now the case to
half per cent below the maximum rate which is con-
sidered the consumers' rate, I see the cost of liv-
ing going up further. As we all know, it must goup;
it is no fault of anyone that it is going up, but when
we do this, we are accelerating it.

I feel, Sir, with these few remarks when the
time comes I would support the sending of the Bill
to a Select Committee, and I do not think the Gov-
ernment should oppose the sending of a Bill of this
magnitude, of this great importance, such a far-
reaching Bill, to a Select Committee.

The question that the Bill be now read a second time
was put and resolved in the affirmative without division.

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: Mr. Speaker, I beg
to move that you do now leave the Chair and the
House go into Committee on the Bill.

Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON: I beg to second that.

Mr. SPEAKER: The question is......

Mr. St. JOHN: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move that
this Bill be now referred to a Select Committee.

Mr. MOTTLEY: I beg to second that.

Mr. SPEAKER: In view of the fact that the Bill
has not yet passed its second reading......

(A VOICE: Oh yes, it is passed.)

Mr. SPEAKER: I apologise to hon. members.

The question that the Bill be referred to a Select Com-
mittee was put and resolved in the negative, the House di-
viding as follows:-

AYES: Mr. LYNCH, Mr. MOTTLEY, Mr. ST.
JOHN, Mr. SMITH 4.

NOES: Mr. YEARWOOD, Hon. E. W. BARROW,
Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON, Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS,
Mr. SPRINGER, Mr. LOWE,Hon. N. W. IBOXILL,
Mr. WEEKS, Mr. HOPPIN 9.


(A VOICE: How can it be so? How can the Prime
Minister vote when the hon. junior member for St.
Peter cannot vote?)

(ANOTHER VOICE: You must be fair, after all.)

Mr. SPEAKER: I am informed by the Clerk of
the House that when the question was put that the Bill
be sent to Select Committee, the Prime Minister was
already in his place, and that, I am told, is the record.
5.30 p.m.

Mr. St. JOHN: Mr. Speaker, I just want to point
out on a point of order that it is incorrect to say that
the Prime Minister had actually taken his seat. He
was walking across. Just now I was walking across
here, and the Clerk is not in a position to say so be-
cause he was sitting there......

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. senior member for
Christ Church has made his point. I am guided by the
records of the House.

It has been moved by the hon. senior member for
St. Andrew and seconded by the hon. junior member
for St. Michael that I do now leave the Chair that
the House may go into Committee on the Bill.

Mr. St. JOHN: I object to that. The hon. senior
member for St. Andrew was about to move the mo-
tion. I am challenging the records of this House. It
is a dishonest record and we have to partake in
honesty, not dishonesty. He was about to move it when
I got up and the hon. member did not complete it.

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: Mr. Speaker, the hon.
senior member for Christ Church is incorrect when
he says I did not move the motion. I moved the mo-
tion that the House go into Committee on the Bill,
and it was seconded by the hon. junior member for
St. Michael.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative,
the House dividing as follows:-

AYES: Mr. YEARWOOD; Hon. E. W. BARROW;
Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON; Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS;
Mr. SPRINGER; Mr. LOWE; Mr. WEEKS; Hon.
N. W. BOXILL and Mr. HOPPIN 9.

NOES: Mr. LYNCH; Mr. MOTTLEY; Mr. HINDS;
Mr. St. JOHN and Mr. SMITH 5.

Mr. SPEAKER left the Chair and the House went into
Committee on the Bill, Mr. YEARWOOD in the Chair.

Clause 1 was called.


Hon. E. W. BARROW: Mr. Chairman, I beg to
move that Clause 1 stand part.

Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative,
the Committee dividing as follouws:-







1010


AYES: Hon. E. W. BARROW; Hon. G. G. FER-.
GUSSON; Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS; Mr. SPRINGER;
Mr. LOWE; Mr. CORBIN; Hon. N. W. BOXILL; Mr.
WEEKS; Mr. HOPPIN; Mr. LYNCH; and Mr.
MOTTLEY 11.

NOES: Mr. HINDS; Mr. St. JOHN andMr. SMITH
3.
Clause was called.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: Mr. Chairman, I beg to
move that Clause 2 stand part.

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: I beg to second that.

Mr. SMITH: Mr. Chairman, Clause 2 reads as
follows:

2. Section 2 of the Rate of Interest Act, 1754
is hereby amended as follows: -

(a) by renumbering the section as sub-
section (1) of section 2; and

(b) by adding immediately thereafter the
following as subsections (2) and (3) -

"(2) Nothing contained in subsec-
tion (1) shall apply to any contract,
judgment, bond, assurance, deben-
ture stock or security which is made,
given, granted, issued or created,as
case may be, on or after 21st Novem-
ber, 1967 for the loan whether direct-
ly or indirectly -

by any bank licensed under the Bank-
ing Act, 1963; or

(b) by such other firm or body corporate
or class of firm or body corporate as
the Minister responsible for finance
may by order specify,

of any moneys to any person in Barbados
at a rate of interest exceeding eight per
cent per annum.

Now, Sir, this is a very important Section. I
raised a point just now, and I was expecting the Hon.
Prime Minister who is in charge of this Bill to reply
in some way so as to allay my fears relative to leav-
ing this gap so wide that one could charge more than
8 per cent and we do not knowhow much would be the
limit.
5.40 p.m.

I expected that the Hon. Minister in charge
would have informed us about things because I still
believe that he knows, and I feel that it is unfair to
members of this House, who do not know, for the Hon.
Prime Minister to withhold such information from
this Hon. House after we have to give the green light
to this Bill. Well, I have now found out why he can
do as he bloody well likes because he has the num-
bers. It is not fair to us, because he has the numbers


to carry the vote and out-vote us, not to let us know
something about this Bill. I do not expect that he
would have pressed this, or would have brought it be-
fore us, without knowing something about it. It is
only because he has the numbers.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: On a point of order. Mr.
Speaker, at the time when the Second Reading was put,
I was inside the Members' LobbyandIwas not in my
place. If the hon. members had waited, instead of try-
ing to rush the Bill into a Select Committee, I would
have been able to reply to all the queries that had
been raised. I do not agree that Ihave the information
which the hon. member attributes to my knowledge.
At the same time, all he has to do, in polite terms,
is to say: "The hon. member is not in his place, and I
should now like him to reply to my query." I would
then answer the question. What I do not expect par-
ticularly from that hon. member, at least, inside this
Legislature, although we know that it is nothing un-
usual for him to be using the expression 'The Prime
Minister can do as he bloody well likes' that lan-
guage is not Parliamentary, neither is it true within
the constitutional framework of Barbados.

Mr. SMITH: Mr. Chairman, when one is vexed,
one is not pleased. Do you think that I could feel happy
or feel like a bridegroom to see that the Prime
Minister came here, he has information, he was in
time to vote, and, now that the matter is dealt with in
Committee, he says that if I had asked him for in-
formation he would have given it to me? I never ex-
pected that he would want me to ask him to do that.
I thought that it would be his duty to the people of
Barbados. If he feels insulted and he feels that I
should not have used the words "bloody well", I will
withdraw them because it is not my intention this
afternoon to fight the Prime Minister. If it were my
intention, I would have started off ina different man-
ner. It is not my intention because the Hon. Minister
of Communications says that this is a festival spirit,
and we are all very jovial today, andI do not want to
end it up in a different manner.

We are in Committee now, Sir, andIam appeal-
ing now to the Hon. Prime Minister, now that I have
withdrawn the words, to tell us something about this
Bill before we go any further. I am appealing to you
now, Sir.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: It does not appear, Mr.
Chairman, that there are other hon. members who
intend to speak on Clause 2. I understand from the
hon. member for St. Joseph that he raised a query,
because he believes tha t I know what the rate of in-
terest is going to be, as to what the limit under Clause
2 is likely to be. First, I shouldlike to point out that
Barbados and Canada are two of the only places within
the Commonwealth...... (Asides)

Mr. CHAIRMAN: I would like hon. members to
observe Rule 29 (6).

Hon. E. W. BARROW: I was just explaining to
hon. members, before I was interrupted by the asides
and not by Your Honour, that Barbados and Canada







1011


were two of the chief countries in the Commonwealth-
that had a similar provision, although not of the same
antiquity. In Canada they have just amended their Rule
of 6 1/2%, but that does not prevent certain interest
rates in Canada from being over 6 1/2%. The posi-
tion is that in these other countries the rate is the
market rate because the rate of interest, as I have
tried to explain in my Second Reading introduction, is
a rent charged for the use of money.

To have a restriction on the rate of interest is
just as laudable and has the same kindof efficacy as
rent control. That is the closest analogy that I can
bring to the attention of hon. members. Everyone
knows that rent control is no solution for the housing
problem. The solution to our housing problem is that
you have to build more houses, and no amount of rent
control that you impose can effectively produce more
houses for the people. As a matter of fact, it has the
opposite effect when you impose rent control. Every-
one in this Chamber knows that I have been opposed
to rent control for the same reason although in cer-
tain countries it has been found necessary. I said the
solution is to flood the market with houses, and the
supply and demand for housing will take care of it-
self. The solution to the problems of Great Britain
and the problems which confront us in Barbados is
exactly of the same nature as the shortage of houses.

The rate of interest is high because there is a
shortage of money, and that brings me straight back
to what I said in my introduction on the Second Read-
ing of the Bill. It is nonsensical and dishonest for any-
one to suggest that the situation which existed in
Barbados in 1958, when we first included a similar
amendment to the Usury Act of 1754, is in any way
analogous or similar to the situationwhich confronts
us today.

In 1958 there was no hue and cry, which the
Barbados dialect would refer to as "human cry".
There was no hue and cry by bankers, by insurance
companies or any other financial business for the
rate of interest ceiling to be raised. There was one
single company inside of Barbados and one single
company outside of Barbados. The one inside of Bar-
bados is what is now known as the Light and Power
Company, and the one outside of Barbados was the
Colonial Development Corporation now better known
as the Commonwealth Development Corporation, and
there was no other reason either given or offered, or
any other kind of excuse even pretended at that time.
It was not even pretended by members on the opposite
side at that time that there was any reason other than
the Light and Power situation here in this country and
the recalcitrance of the Commonwealth Development
Corporation, which they have not got over up to now.

As a matter of fact, Iwill say this: they have been
pressing this Government since 1961 to abolish the
Usury Act in the same Commonwealth Development
Corporation, and they have withheld funds from Bar-
bados. They have withheldL5 million since 1961,long
before the ceiling rose to 8%. I have taken this up
with the Prime Minister of Great Britain. I told him
- that I thought it was iniquitous that a Corporation,


which was sponsored and sustained by HerMajesty's
Treasury, should be treating the Colonies and Inde-
pendent Territories as if there were people coming
to the money-lenders in the open market.

Maybe, I am too harsh, at this stage, because I
have recently been informed that special arrange-
ments have been made by the Treasury for the Urban
Development Corporation to get funds from the Com-
monwealth Development Corporation. Special ar-
rangements have been made in that the Treasury is
prepared to subsidise the money which they lend to
us, so that we can keep the mortgage rate down to
8% even after this Bill is passed.
5.50 p.m.

I have not seen it on paper yet. They have not sent
me this official thing, but the point is this: even then
the Commonwealth Development Corporation, may
have, since it is long term money, over thirty years,
to borrow this money at much more than eight per
cent, but the Treasury has promised to subsidise it.
Right now the Commonwealth Development Corpora-
tion operating in Barbados cannot borrow any money
at all for us to get the Cave Hill Scheme off the
ground. The British Treasury, I understand from
fairly reliable quarters and I will bringhon. mem-
bers information as soon as they send it to me of-
ficially is now prepared, realisingthatthis devalu-
ation will cause a hardship on Barbados and other
places, to provide some kind of subsidy to subsidize
the borrowing rate for C.D.C. in order that they may
re-lend through the Finance Corporation to house-
owners to keep the rate of interest at a reasonable
level. (Mr. MOTTLEY: House owners?) Property
owners. The point is that, subsidy or no subsidy, it
will still be illegal for C.D.C. to get that money. The
subsidy is entirely up to us, in that we keep our rate
down, but C.D.C. in these circumstances cannot even
borrow the money to be subsidized if the bank rate is
eight per cent.

However, Sir, that has not been the reason for the
introduction of this Bill, because that information has
only come to me comparatively recently. I only quote
this as a further example that we should not be doing
ourselves a great disservice. Now the immediate
reason for the introduction of the Bill was the ques-
tion of keeping commerce, and so on, andthe wheels
of commerce turning over in this island. Some hon.
members on the other side have a certain amount of
business experience like the hon. seniormemberfor
St. Joseph, the hon. senior member for the City and
so on. You can ignore the others because they are
"theoreticians". (Laughter). They have never done
an honest day's work in their lives,butthe other two
hon. members have some experience and have to do
certain things at the bank and so on. You cannot get
in here and abuse bank managers, and charge them
with being usurious, unscrupulous and that sort of
thing. They have to follow the policies of their Head
Office. (Mr. MOTTLEY: We did not abuse the bank
managers). You were not inhere andyou did not hear
them. That is an aside, Mr. Speaker.What I am say-
ing is this, that the bank managers may have been
Barbadian, but they have to follow the instructions







1012


which they receive from their Head Offices, Iam say-
ing, as a positive fact, that there is a lot of dis -saving
in Barbados. We live on the margin. By and large,
the average citizen in this island does not have any
money to lend; he is a borrower, he is not a lender.
The people in Barbados who have money spread their
risks all through the Commonwealth,and sometimes in
foreign countries as well. In other words,the excess
income which they have after they have filled all their
requirements, even in luxurious living some of them
make enough money that they have the money to in-
vest. It is not all deposited inthe banks of Barbados.
Some of it goes into real estate and a lot of it goes
into industries, in stocks and shares in countries
abroad. There are three firms in Barbados Mussons
Da Costa and Brydens who act as investment
brokers, and these three firms are also very closely
connected with the source of capital formation inthis
island. Let us get the picture straight. The people who
make money in Barbados do not put it into the banks.
As a matter- of fact, in some instances, they them-
selves attract money which should go in the banks
because they pay premiums and they pay interest
rates to people who deposit money with them. Hon.
members will remember those who were here in
the House and who were not merely debating this
thing out of malice but have the economy of Barbados
at heart, will remember that during the consideration
of the Banking Act, I was constantly urging on the
other side not to have too strict an interpretation of
the term "Bank" because a lot of business houses
in Barbados were now able to finance their operations
and not go to these foreign banks all of which are
foreign in Barbados to borrow money, andthat they
may be restricted in getting money from well -wishers
shareholders and so on who deposit money with them.
You cannot blow hot and cold. We aaid that for the
purposes of that Act, they would not be a bank. That
is very fortunate, as it has now turnedout to be, be-
cause had we insisted on describing their operations
as banking operations in 1963 when the Banking Act
was passed in this House, it would mean that today
when we introduced this amendment, they wouldhave
come under the same dispensation and they would be
able to charge whatever interest rates they wanted
if they loaned out money, or they would be able to
borrow it at whatever kind of interest they liked. So
they are not banks within the meaning of this Act,
because they would be specifically the hon. senior
member for the City will remember that they were
specifically excluded under the Banking Act of 1963.

Now, let us be realistic. There are twenty-four
people in this Chamber under normal circumstances,
including His Honour the Speaker. We are supposed to
be the political leaders of Barbados. Some of them
have been in politics for a long time and some of them
have been in business for a long time, But how many
of the twenty-four political leaders in Barbados can
honestly say that they are money lenders? There are
none on this side that I know about. There are ab-
solutely none. (Mr. SMITH: The Captain).
We are really a borrowing community right here in
this Chamber. How many of us cango to a garage and
pay cash for a motor car? None of us on this side,
and very few on that side. This is not criticism; this


is a statement of fact. The people who run garages
in Barbados, as far as I can remember now, are
nearly all Barbadian firms and they give a tremen-
dous amount of credit to everybody in the community,
except a handful of people who can go in, leaving His
Honour the Speaker aside, and say; "Well, I want a
motor car: Here is the cash money for it." There
are not many people in this island who could do that.
There are no garages which are not locally owned -
even Mr. Thom, understand, does not control Robert
Thom any more and these garages have to borrow
money when they import cars and they have to wait
for two or three years to get paid back. Now the banks
in their turn cannot go to any section of the community
- there are no Duponts,Rockefellers and Rothschilds
in Barbados. If they come here, they only come for a
vacation. One Rothschild invested $15,000 in Barba-
dos and he lost it; so I doubt that he will invest any
more. The head of the family invested $15,000 here
and lost it, and he lost his interest in investing money
here. There are no people like that who have built
up and amassed fortunes in the Oil Industry; there
are no Lombards, Morgans and so on, in Barbados,
and the Martins who, for three hundred years, have
been piling up money and making money out of wars
and that kind of thing. Our capital formation in Bar-
bados comes from the people who work in industry and
who work in commerce and who may deposit some of
their money with the banks in Barbados. Theythem-
selves are borrowers at the same time thatthey de-
posit money.

I will tell you this, that one of the banks, without
calling any specific bank, at one time had 13% more
advances in loans than they had deposits (ASIDES) -
there are deposits of all kinds cash in hand, money
on call and short notice, and Government securities,
fixed time deposits and everything, the whole balance
sheet. (ASIDES)

Mr. CHAIRMAN: Is the hon. member addressing
the Chair? (ASIDES). While anhon. member is speak-
ing, all other hon. members shall be silent. That is
what I understand by the Rules. Let the Hon. Minis-
ter proceed.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: One of the banks had 13%
more advances on loans than deposits. Where did
that money come from? They had to borrow day by
day. We have sometimes to bring in money from
London in order to meet the demands of the cus-
tomers of the bank, and particularly at certain times
of the year like at Christmas time. Right now is a
time of crisis in the banking world.
6.00 p.m.

Let me explain to hon. members. I heard a lot
of propaganda from the other side. I would ignore
some of it. I appreciate that a country that hasa
Central Bank that has a note department and an issue
department is free to print money in order to meet
the situation in which there is a demand for credit.
Of course, if you do it like Brazil, it means that you
go on deflating and deflating so that the peso in Brazil
is only worth one-tenth of what it was, say, three or
four years ago because they printed too much money.







1013


But, I am stating a positive fact here now. At.
Christmas time when there is an increased demand
for credit in the United Kingdom, they do not borrow
money from anybody; the Bank of England prints more
money, but they call it back in during the first week
in January and burn it. But they have that privilege
because there is a flow of goods in all services at
Christmas time, it can guarantee that it is not just
money printed for gambling or something like that
and it is printed in orderto keep the economy flowing
and viable.

In one year I have known that the figure recently
published in what you call the fiduciary issue in the
United Kingdom you will find it somewhere three or
four pages from the back of the "Economist" they
printed t20 million in notes at Christmas time and
burnt them by the 8th January the next year because
there was such a terrific pressure on the commercial
banks in the United Kingdom for credit to sell Christ-
mas goods of all grades from outside. But they can
get around it that way.

Now, here in Barbados at Christmas time unless
we have money coming in from abroad and it does
not really come because you borrow the money may
be on your Central Bank and you transfer drafts to
manufacturers in England. You have a Head Office
bank over there.

For somebody to get up in a simple debate like
this and say: "Let us go to Select Committee where
we will find out everything, I cannot really under-
stand why. Banking in Barbados is not a simple mat-
ter. It is very complicated business. Right up to two
weeks before the deflation, even the Chancellor of the
Exchequer in Great Britain did not understand what a
complicated thing it was, in my opinion. He did not
understand what he was dealing with. It is an ex-
tremely complicated business. But he is first class
economist, of course, according to Lord Cromer,
who was a former Governor of the Bank of England.
He is suggesting that Mr. James Callaghan did not
understand what was going on. I read that just to show
you that you can go in the House of Lords and over-
simplify this thing and say that we can get all the
money we want.

If we had a Central Bankin Barbados,at Christ-
mas time we would print money and issue it to the
banks and say to them: "payus back;" we would give
the money to the commercial banks and sayto them:
"Try and get that money back in here by the end of
January because we do not want inflation." When
more goods are being bought and circulated in the
community, you have to have more money in order
to purchase these goods. It stands to reason. There
is a seasonal fluctation in credit, quite apart from
the normal level of credit, for financing your pur-
chases and that kind of thing.

Now, to suggest that the situation today is not
different from the situation in 1958 is absolutely
ridiculous and dishonest, because as I pointed out in
1958 there was one firm that wanted this thing raised
and one firm that wanted to borrow. Here it is today


that the whole business community finds itself in a
frustrated state because we do not manage our own
currency and because we do not have a Central Bank
and because it is necessary for the banks to operate
abroad. I am giving the hon. member the assurance...

Mr. MOTTLEY: Did you say the whole com-
munity?

Hon. E. W. BARROW: Let me put it this way.
There is no law in this country which says anything
about any rate of interest. They are realistic and they
realise that the bank rates have gone up. When they
go into the banks to get money, all the banks have to
say is that they do not have the money because they
do not print money. You expect me to wave a magic
wand to print more money overnight; I heardthe se-
nior member for St. Thomas talking about Mr. Cecil
Andrew King saying that he has a licence to print his
own money. He said that Mr. Cecil Andrew King stated
that the radio and television licence granted him in
the United Kingdom was a licence equivalent to print
his own money. Did he say that or not?

Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: On a point of order. If
it is that he has asked me, in fact, what I said was in
relation to Section 2 (e) "by any other firm or body
corporate or class of firm as the Minister responsible
for finance may by order specify." I saidthat it was
wrong to put in the Minister of Finance's hands a
licence for somebody t6 print money. I then said -
I would not say Mr. Cecil Andrew King I said
Mr. Cecil King said that the grant of a television li-
cence to him was the same thing as a licence to him
to print money, and that is a point, with the few
months I have been in the House, it did not appear to
me that the Minister of Finance has been controlling.

Mr. CHAIRMAN: Point made. Will the hon. senior
member for St. John now proceed.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: I now understand the hon.
member to say that he did not say Mr. Cecil Andrew
King, he said Mr. Cecil King. Am I correct? That is
now on the record of the House. Well, for the hon.
member's information, Mr. Cecil King or Mr. Cecil
Andrew King never had a radio and television licence.
The statement which he re-affirmed had been made
by Mr. Cecil King was made by Lord Thomson when
he was granted a Scottish television licence.

I opened the trap wider and he walked straight
into it. He thought I was driving at something else.
I just wanted to correct him for the record that Mr.
Cecil King did not have a television licence in the
United Kingdom, either through the ladder cf the
B.B.C., the Scottish Television or Television ,ires
and West. It was Lord Thomson who made a statement
to that effect and it was in fact with Scottish Tele-
vision. That point having been made, I will carry on.

.(ASIDE)

Mr. CHAIRMAN: Is the hon. junior member for
St. Thomas addressing the Chair? Let the hon. senior
member for St. John proceed.







1014


Hon. E. W. BARROW: I really, Mr. Chairman,.
have nothing, despite all the nasty remarks thathave
been made by certain hon. members, to add to what
I said in my opening remarks because I explained all
the implications of this Bill to the best of my knowl-
edge and ability all the background of it, the need
for it, and the need for urgency and everything else.

But in so far as the hon. senior member for St.
Joseph is concerned, he is the only person that raised
any view point because he said that he believed that
I knew what the rate of interest was going to be. Well,
I started off by explaining that interest is really the
rent charged for the use of money, just as how we
charge rent for the use of a house.

For me to say that I knew what the rate of in-
terest is does not mean that the sky is going to be
the limit; it is going to be question of what the sup-
ply and demand for money is going to be like.
6.10 p.m.

If the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Roy
Jenkins, some time next year reduces the bank rate,
since the Bank of England is the lender in the last
resort, obviously if the bank rate is 8per cent, any-
body who has to lend, if they have to go back to the
bank as the hon. senior member for St. Thomas
himself said it is a deflationary device. The increase
in the bank rate is supposed to discourage people
from borrowing, but we are in a cleft-stick here in
Barbados, because borrowing in the United Kingdom
is usually for the purpose of hire-purchase goods,
manufacture and that kind of thing, and they usually
have to employ various devices they have done so
three weeks ago to discourage people from buying
hire-purchase items and concentrate on exporting
items. So the rate of interest by the Bank of England
is a deflationary device to discourage people from
borrowing. When the balance of payments is re-
dressed, we all hope that the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer is going to reduce the bank rate, and since
the bank rate is at an unprecedented height and it
certainly was not at 8 per cent in 1958 because it
was 7 per cent for a very short time a matter of
weeks we do not know until confidence for the
pound is restored that money will be available.

There is another side to this that even the peo-
ple who normally would deposit here in Barbados do
not know; it is not 3 1/2% or 4 1/2% on the fixed de-
posit; it is something like 5 1/2% or 5 3/4% for cer-
tain deposits, and for longer time deposits, it is 5%.
The other danger, Mr. Chairman, is this I do not
mind asides of a certain quality; it is when they get
below a certain level that I think they should not be
entertained in Parliament. If it is for the purpose of
enlightenment, I can answer any question. I think we
have to have a little flexibility in the course of de-
bate, but not abuse our licence.

When you come to this question of the bank rate,
that is one of the very reasons why they are only
paying to certain depositors five per cent or 5 1/2%
on fixed time deposits; but even with the fixed time
deposits in the Bank, although you say you are going


to leave your money there for two years, five years
or seven years, there is no law to prevent you, if you
found that in Trinidad you could get 7 1/2 per cent,
8 per cent or 8 1/%, from going and saying you want
back your time deposit and that you are going to de-
posit it in Trinidad. This is what the Bank Managers
are really fearing. They want to hold what depositors
they have and they want at the same time to be able
to attract money from their Head Offices and from
other places abroad.

Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Mr. Chairman, on a
point of order, the Prime Minister must really be
careful. Is he in fact saying that the fixed rate for
Trinidad is 8 per cent or 8 1/2 per cent?

Mr. CHAIRMAN: I do not deem that to be a point
of order.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: I did not say the fixed de-
posit rate. I do not know what the deposit rate in
Trinidad is. I can tell you that the hon. senior member
for Bridgetown reminded me that some rates of in-
terest in Trinidad are as high as 10 per cent, and a
man who has money is not concerned about whether
he is getting 10 per cent on fixed deposit, or getting
it from what you get down in Trinidad called a wey-
way game; he is not concerned aboutwhom it is com-
ing from; so for the purpose of illustration, all I was
saying was that if a man has a fixed deposit here in
Barbados and he knows he can get a greater interest
in Trinidad when taking everything into consideration,
he would play about with 3/4 per cent or 1 per cent,
and if other people in similar institutions are in a
position in other territories now to increase their
fixed deposit rates and Barbados is not in a position
to increase their fixed deposit rate, it is very simple;
you transfer from one account to the other. I am
saying that the Bank Managers in Barbados are con-
cerned about the outflow of money which up to the
time that I invited them to have a certain amount of
control, although it is not sanctioned by law yet,
something like $500,000 a month was being trans-
ferred at the time when I introduced this Bill. I am
saying that as a positive fact. Even before devaluation
there was a strong feeling inthe United Kingdom, and
there was a flight, money being transferred from one
place to the other long before the Chancellor of the
Exchequer made his announcement, and in Barbados
it had amounted to $500,000, not as a result of any-
thing we were doing here in Barbados or not doing,
but as a result of people's anticipation and people's
fears about what was going to happen.

I will say this now: I was seriously considering
about three or four months before this, and I think I
intimated to hon. members before that I had written
off to get a full list of the market values on the up-
to-dateness of our stock and so on so that I could
join in the flight too and transfer some of Barbados'
securities over to the other side. I do not mean
Peking; I mean the United States or Canada. I was
in the process of doing that. In other words, if you
have securities which have a market value of, let us
say, $10 million, and you are gettingayield on those
securities of 3 1/2% or 4%, you do not lose anything







1015


if you sell those securities and get $5 million of stock.
or gilt-edge to get 7% or 8% because your yield is
the same. The total volume of income coming in is
the same, although you nowhave to pay twice as much
for it. Similarly, if there is any devaluation and you
transfer money over the other side, although the rate
of interest in America was 5 1/2% or 6 % and you had
bought American securities with that money, you
would be in a much stronger position today. My little
exercise did not come off because I did not know
the day nor the hour, and we had just been working
on it as a normal sort of routine matter. I do not
have the gift of prophecy. I have never claimed that.
The members over the other side claim they have
the gift of prophecy. Let them when they come to
control the finances of the country go ahead and do
these things. I can only make intelligent guesses about
what is likely to happen.

As far as the hon. senior member for St. Joseph
is concerned, I would just like to say this: I cannot
tell him that the rate wouldbe 8 1/2%, 8 1/4% or 10%.
It does not mean that people who have mortgages in
this country will have to payhigher rates of interest.
I do not intend to allow any Solicitors, because they
are firms, or any group like insurance companies
lending money to call in their defeasances and put up
the rates of interest. They would have to get au-
thority to do it. We have specifically excluded Trust
Companies from this and they know it. (A VOICE:
The Banks lend on mortgages .)The Banks do not lend on
mortgages; you owe mortgages to a particular person
or a particular firm or insurance company, and the
Trust Companies are not going to be exempted either.
I am saying that I am not going to allow any mort-
gages to go up. Even the mortgages of U.D.C. will not
be over 8%; it has got to be subsidized by the British
Treasury. (Mr. MOTTLEY: Well, put that in the Bill.)
I tell you that as the person who is responsible. I do
not draft Bills on my feet. We go through a tiresome
exercise on this thing. Do you think I am not aware
of the Trust Companies? I am ready for the Trust
Companies whenever they come. The Trust Company
is a separate and distinct entity from the Bank. I am
aware of the existence of Trust Companies in Barba-
dos, and I am aware that the Banks do trust business.
6.20 p.m.

But the very nature of their being Trust means
that they are trustees for somebody else's money,
and not trustees for their own money. It may be Roy
Best of Nassau, or somebody who died and left a lot
of money, or somebody like that. All I, as Minister of
Finance, can do is to tell members what this Gov-
ernment intends to do. That is all I can do. If you do
not agree with it, you can try andget me out of here.
I cannot amend a Bill hereto dot the i's and cross the
t's. The Bill is drafted in such away that we have to
watch the situation.

Now, as I said before, this may be a measure, I
hope, that we may only have to keep in force, maybe,
for three or six months. It is unfortunate that, at this
particular time of the year, all of these things have
happened all of a sudden without any jurisdiction or
control by any of the Overseas Governments. It is a


situation which has been thrust on us. I think that I
have explained to hon. members what the position of
the Government is in this matter. I do not think that
hon. members have anything to fear if I say that
mortgages cannot and will not go up.

The only mortgage work that has been heldup up
to now is from C.D.C. I understand from very re-
liable quarters; but I have not received the letter in
my hand, that the Treasury is going to subsidise the
C.D.C. and the Cave Hill Development; so that my
reservations will be observed, and we do not have
an overall rate at Cave Hill which will exceed 8% even
independent of devaluation. They have committed
themselves before devaluation; they have withheld
the letter, but I nowunderstand from reliable sources
closely connected with the Treasury that, even des-
pite the new bank rate and despite devaluation, they
intend to stick to their word. Iwouldlike to give hon.
members this assurance.

Having told you about C.D.C., it is not generally
known or understood that our launching the project
is delayed because of straightening out these finan-
cial difficulties. We could not take money which was
devoted to the Development Plan to finance that. We
have always felt that the financing of the building of
approximately 5,000 houses to house, maybe 25,000
people should be a separate and distinct financial
undertaking.

A few years ago we had down here Mr. Charles
Abrams of the Massachusettes Institute of Technology
one of the foremost housing experts in the U.S.A. and
a man whose services are frequently used by the
United Nations Technical Assistance Programme.
Now on what did Mr. Abrams and I arrive at the same
conclusion, and he included it in his report? It is this:
in a country like Barbados it is all very well and good
to build houses because we need them. It is laudable
for Government to acquire land, as we did for this
purpose, in that you can do proper planning, laying
out of all of your community centres, your services
and so on. We have done all this. On paper we have
bought the land; we have built the feeder roads; put in
water; we have built a newreservoir at Cave Hill and
so on; the Light and Power Company innow ready to
move in and so is the Natural Gas Corporation. The
infrastructural arrangements have been completed.


That is all very good, but you have a situation
here in Barbados where mortgage money is at a
premium. Mr. Abrams and I agreed that when the
Finance Corporation was set up which would under-
write the mortgages for the Urban Development
Programme I should like to remind hon. members
that whereas 60% is about the maximum that one can
expect to get from any lender in Barbados for a
Housing mortgage so you have to acquire the land
and find 30% to 40% minimum of the cost of con-
.struction of your house; the store, or the lumber yard,
or whatever you call them, or the bank will give you
bridging financing until you complete the house and
arrange a mortgage we are ready for 90% at the
U.D.C.








1016


Now what Mr. Abrams and I agreed on and the
Cabinet has accepted is that once we put our hands on
this money that is, we get the Finance Company
set up to give the Government-guaranteed mort-
gages the money should be available not only to
people who buy houses in Cave Hill, or in any other
areas specifically allocated, but there are a lot of
people in Barbados Civil Servants and waterfront
workers, who have a piece of land but do not have
enough money to buy or build houses and who do not
have the 30% of their own money a lot of them are
still paying on the land after acquiring it ten years
ago. The hon. member for the City can tell you about
that. They will pay a few dollars when they get their
bonus and so on. The land is nottheirs and they can-
not get the money.

We decided that the Government will guarantee
mortgages not only (Asides) If thehon. members
would listen, they would not make stupid pronounce-
ments from time to time; they would be educated and
edified. (Asides) If we are now getting subsidized
mortgage loans through the British Treasury and
C.D.C., and we are making money available not only
to the people who buy at Cave Hill, but to anybody who
has a piece of land and who is going to erect an
edifice or house which conforms with certain mini-
mum requirements, then we would be able to stabilize
the mortgage rate outside as well. (Mr. MOTTLEY:
Not chattel houses.) Not chattel houses, because you
have people in Barbados who are making a living out
of selling chattel houses to insurance companies; so
we cannot take the risk in chattel houses. We lend
people through the Housing Authority, or General
Workers Loans, or Agricultural Workers Loans. We
loan out a lot of money on very heavily subsidized
rates of interest for chattel houses to people who
would normally be living in chattel houses, but we
are talking about the man who has a piece of land of
his own.

I The only reason why we have a lot of board and
shingle houses in Barbados is that the people do not
own the houses. On a Friday night, before we passed
the Security of Tenure Bill now that you cannot
throw a man off like a hoe handle he had to fold up
his house like a valise and walk away with it because
he did not own the land. They could get notice at any
time before this Government gave them security of
tenure. (Asides) There is no six months' notice out
of any tenantry in Barbados that is agricultural
tenantries. They can give you notice to give up the
land, but they cannot give you notice to give up the
house spot. We had a case up to last week in St.
Philip. They cannot make you give up the house spot;
but they can make you give up the agricultural land
with a six months' notice expiring on the lst May.
(Asides)

Mr. CHAIRMAN: I would like hon. members to
be silent.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: There are people in this
country, Mr. Chairman, who would like to tell you that
a certain law is not a law at all; "Do not worry with
what you see there, because that is not law"; so, even


if you pass a Security of Tenure Bill, there are peo-
ple on the other side who would want to tell you that
they passed it, or it is no kindof law because they be-
lieve that somebody will be evicted. Name one case
in which a tenantry of more than five houses in which
a man has paid his rent has been evicted since we
passed that Act!

Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: On a point of order.
Several cases have been before the Supreme Court
where an eviction order has been made.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: Obviously, the only cases
that can go before the court are cases where people
do not comply with the provisions of the Act. I do not
have to go into that. You would not have to go into
Court if you have paid the rent, unless the land was
needed for public purposes. What kind of nonsense
is this? The reason why I have gone to great length
to explain the position not of the position of the
economy of Barbados at this juncture quite apart
from any personal undertakings which I may give,
is to assure hon. members that movements are al-
ready in train to make sure that people outside will
not be depending on the normal lending institutions for
mortgages. We have a scheme right now where, in-
stead of getting 70% only of the cost of the house,
people will be able to get up to 90% depending on the
value of the house. It is 90%ofthe first $12,000; 80%
of the next $8,000, and I think 70% on the last $4,000
up to $24,000; so the people in Barbados never had it
so good.
6.30 p.m.

They did not have security of tenure; they did not
have this Scheme about to be launched. The Govern-
ment did not have 600 acres of land to build a satel-
lite town, and they had no assurance for anybody that
they could get up to 90% mortgages on their houses.
Now how could anybody in his right senses, in a situa-
tion of crisis like this, try to make political capital
out of a Bill which his own Party in less justifiable
circumstances, pushed through this House I would
say in non-justifiable circumstances is beyond my
comprehension.

Mr. St. JOHN: Mr. Chairman, the longer the
Prime Minister speaks, the more it appears to us that
what he tells us is not always in accordance with
the facts. I do not want to go over the period when the
Act was amended by the former Government: Ido not
want to go over that period because the Prime Minis-
ter will remember that, not so long ago, he told us
that if one looked at the statistics of banking in this
country, he will see that one of the essential differ-
ences between his period of time as Minister of Fi-
nance and previously, was that previously the banks
used to lend out more money in Barbados than there
were deposits; but now in his Ministry of Finance,
since he has stimulated the economy of this island,
there were greater savings, and now the banks ac-
tually lend out less money in Barbados thanks saved
by depositors., He said that I heard it with my own
two ears in his Budget Sr-Pch. He said that.
Hon. E. W. BARROW: On a point of order. That
was 100% correct, but in June this year there was no







1017


devaluation of the pound or increasing the bank rate
to 8%. I was trying to explain to the hon. member it
is hard to penetrate his consciousness that this is
what the Managers of the banks fear, that this whole
situation will not be reversed and put us back in the
bad old days of the Barbados Labour Party. Can I try
to make it more clear? How dishonest can people be
in Barbados? I do not know of any other country in
the world where you get this kind of dishonesty going
on.

Mr. St. JOHN: Now you see, Sir? I am not going
to get annoyed. The Prime Ministerof Englandwould
not be able to rattle me either, because I know the
point I am making. I am makingthis point: the Prime
Minister is saying that the circumstances in 1958
were not such as to justify a change at that time;
there was only one firm in question. Iam saying that
in Barbados now, the banks are not lending out the
amount of money which they get from the depositors
in Barbados, so that the argument that they had the
opportunity to borrow the money must have the same
force as today, or the statistics are wrong. Obviously,
if you are not lending out now as much money as you
get from Barbados, you cannot go andargue and say:
"Look, we have to go abroad to borrow this money
at more than 8%; how can we go abroad and borrow it
at 8% and come back here andlendit out at 8% too?"
That is why the Prime Minister put in the little
"slip in" in his speech, the little point about an in-
dividual bank of which he is not calling the name,
that loaned out 13% over its deposits. But let the
banks tell you this: I make no apology for saying it. I
did not curse bank managers or accuse them of being
unscrupulous, I never said that. What I saidwas that
I cannot understand the psychology of the banks. When
the bank rates comes down, they do not reduce their
overdraft rate to the extent as they ask us now to give
them permission now that the bank rate is up. They
are either maintaining a relationship of 11/2% or 2%
or whatever it is in relation to the bank rate. When
the bank rate is down,let them reduce their overdraft
rates. When the bank rate is up,then they have a jus-
tifiable cause for coming and saying that they want to
raise their interest rate.

The second point that we have been makinghere
and we will continue to make is this: if this flight of
money took place as it is alleged by the Banks to the
Prime Minister, why don't they raise their deposit
rate to try and keep some of that money in Barbados?
But no, they did not raise the deposit rate. What as-
surance does the Prime Minister have under the
terms of this Bill, what powers have been granted to
him to ensure that havingallowed them to lend money
at a higher percentage than 8 per cent that they will
raise their deposit rate in Barbados? Absolutely none.
The only thing is that if they do not raise it, they will
go abroad and get some; but the point made about
moving the money, which the Prime Minister talked
about before devaluation, was because we do nothave
any confidence in the pound. It was not transferred out
of the sterling area; it was transferred outside and
the Prime Minister has the Exchange Control Regu-
lations with which he can deal with that.


As to the position in Trinidad, only this week I
heard from there that an Exchange Control movement
even out of the sterling area, is in force in Barbados,
so that with this Bill here, the point which we have
been making is that there is no specific amount, and
what the Prime Minister has done now is to allow the
mechanism of the demand and supply to regulate it,
when all of our tradition has been that, as the Prime
Minister himself has said, we have been a nation of
borrowers, and we need the protection of the Govern-
ment. Just as the Prime Minister has to get up and
say that he has got to protect the consumers of Bar-
bados, because a few control the distribution of goods
in this country, and he has to protect the public from
being exploited by them, we say this: a few bahks
control the money supply in this country and the
Government's duty is to protect us too. It is illogical
and farcical to suggest that you are goingto allow the
mechanism of demand and supply to regulate your
interest rates when you are dealing here with people
because you say that you have to control it. A few
banks in 1966 one of them was named by the Prime
Minister and if these figures have been radically
changed, where are the figures? The Prime Minister
has them in his possession; let him deliver them -
sixty-six million dollars in loans and advances and
$82 million in deposits. That is whatthe figures say,
so that when they come and tell you about this 13%,
that may be one isolated bank, but let us deal with
the totality of deposits in the banks in Barbados.
Again the Prime Minister repeats that the Govern-
ment does not intend to allow this to happen to mort-
gages, but the banks themselves lend money on mort-
gages by equitable deposits. Well, Sir, last week in
the Supreme Court of Barbados, the Royal Bank of
Canada brought a foreclosure action in execution of an
equitable mortgage; so to suggest that, in this Bill, the
Prime Minister has any power to prevent a bank from
lending at a rate greater than 8 percent on a mort-
gage is, in my opinion, the conduct that he has ac-
cused us of, intellectual dishonesty and an attempt
to mislead this House, because the Section says quite
clearly: "Nothing contained in Subsection (1) shall
apply to any contract", and the Prime Minister will
know that a mortgage is a contract;"judgment", that
is another means of lending money on mortgage in
Barbados; "bond"; well we cannot say that a bond
is a mortgage, but "assurance" goes with it as a
wide enough term to include both a legal and equitable
mortgage; and "debenture" which is a known means,
where you have a company, that you have a debenture
on your floating stock, and that is a mortgage. You
can execute it like a mortgage specifically under the
Companies Act; so it is only an attempt to mislead
this House to suggest that this does not apply to
mortgages.
6.40 p.m.

It does apply to mortgages and what we are say-
ing is that you place the small minority who have
control over the majority in this country, ina better
and more advantageous position than anybody else.
Why should they have this preferential treatment in
this country? If the Prime Minister is not going to
arm himself with powers to ensure that the rights







1018
' "- 7," ,, l '', ,


that you give them cannot be used to exploit the public
in this country, you should have taken powers to deal
with the relationship between the deposit rate which
they pay to our customers in Barbados and the lending
rate. That is why we say that this Bill is defective.

The other point is this. He says thathe does not
intend to give the insurance companies permission
with respect to the mortgages. Let us look at the
position. When the insurance companies go for
bridging finance, when they know that they have a
certain amount of securities becoming due or invest-
ments to hand and they want to lend it out, mortgage
transactions may be right, but do they come and bor-
row from the bank?

The financiers are now going to be in a position
to lend at a greater extent than 8 per cent, but the
Prime Minister says that they cannot lend at more
than 8 per cent. Absolute nonsense. I do not believe it.
The Prime Minister knows withinhis conscience that
he cannot resist the pressure that is going to be put
upon him to allow a general all round increase in the
rate of interest.

This is not the time to fool us in this country. He
knows that he is not going to be able to resist the
pressure; he would have to back down. It is like
Bank's Beer. The Prime Minister knows that the
pressure is going to be put onhim and that is why we
say that there is no need for this Bill. There is no
necessity for this Bill.

We do not believe these statistics given by the
banks. Why they say that $500,000 a month or week
was leaving this country? That would have left this
country, anyhow, because that is money and people do
not believe, or are speculators one or the other.
We all heard the Prime Minister say that he never
went in for the speculating game. That was specula-
ting; but the point is that this is speculating money,
and whether you had this Bill or not, they were still
using their economic judgment to try and switch from
sterling to dollar to make money. Therefore, Sir, to
say that this Bill would stop that is a joke.

As to the position of attracting Trinidad money -
and you hear that we have a high rate of interest -
Trinidad has currency control; Trinidad has re-
sisted transfers even within the sterling area. Only
last week some payment had to be made here in
Barbados so that the situation tonight in Barbados is
far different from what it was in 1958. The banks do
not lend out as much money. The banks now in Bar-
bados are getting more money out of Barbados than
in lending to Barbadians. Do not mindhowthey juggle
with it, your statistics are nonsense one or the
other.

There was no need in truth and fact for this Bill.
It is much wider in scope. It introduces a preferential
element in this community, and I am surprisedat the
Prime Minister who repeatedly declared against the
small minority exploiting the large majority of this
community, now bringing this Bill, endorsing the
small minority in this country.


Mr. MOTTLEY: The Prime Minister was not in
here when I spoke. There is one note I made. He said
that the commercial community wanted it. Ithinkthat
I have made myself clear when Iwas dealing with the
matter. In a matter of this sort, you say that the com-
mercial community wanted it. Unlike 1958, there was
a hue and cry. Well, I think we have differing informa-
tion on this particular subject.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: If the hon. member would
give way. I explained that it is not that they said it
because obviously they have to pay more for their
money, but they know that the wheels of commerce
would probably grind to a standstill if they do not
have a similar position to that. That is what I ex-
plained.

Obviously, nobody likes to pay more for any-
thing not even the importers in this country like
paying more.I see their advances and their sight
drafts, and so on. That is how I qualified it. It is not
that they desire this or that this is something which
they are anxious to have. Oh, nol They prefer not to
have it at all. The peculiar circumstances is that they
cannot get along unless something is done.

Mr. MOTTLEY: When I heard that at first, I
understood the commercial community wanted it.
There was this hue and cry. The position is unlike
that in 1958. I remember there was a meeting of the
Manufacturers' Representatives in Barbados one day
when a big dinner was given. He was invited to this
dinner and he sat next to the manager of the Bank of
England. In his speech, he said that he was pleased
to hear that it was said that Barbados negotiating with
commercial houses abroad was second only to Finland
in that they never had anybody in Barbados falling
over the whole period, going bankruptandowingthem
money.

I have said that for this reason, to point this out.
The Prime Minister might not have been in here to
hear what I said, I said that the commercial commu-
nity wanted what amount that they have agreed to but
we have different information from this point of view.

As far as I know, and I believe the Prime Min-
ister should know this. Manufacturers' Represen-
tatives in this country order goods on consignment
and as longas the leadingfirms have been doing busi-
ness I am talking more of eatable stuff than any-
thing else; I am not talking about motor cars because
I am not interested in that; I am talking about food
because I believe that the idea of the Prime Minister
himself is to keep the cost of living down and the most
important thing which they would go up on today is
food.
6.50 p.m.

As far as the Trust Companies are concerned,
the Hon. Prime Minister said quite clearly that he
would in some way assure us that this would not hap-
pen, but I want to assure him today that banks have
taken a different turn in Barbados andare lending on
mortgages, and whoever tells him not is just lying.
(Hon. E. W. BARROW: On long term mortgages?)







1019
--~ 'i -


Theyjare lending on mortgages. I have studied this
very carefully, and I believe it should be left alone.
I do not think there should be this unnecessary and
undue haste. I thought myself when the Prime Minis -
ter did not accept the suggestion that it could not go
through that he had a reason for postponing it until
now.

The idea of telling us that money must come in
or that the banks will not be doing this business is
incorrect. The business which we must do is in edible
stuff. It does not matter to us about the cars which
we are ordering. The Prime Minister has the right
to control the exchange of money andthe importation
of goods from certain countries, but this does not
matter at all. What matters to me is the consignment
of a shipment of flour or meal. I know that we get
these items from West Germany, but some must come
from within the area for which we have to pay in
dollars. When it comes to talking aboutthe commer-
cial community desiring it, I am prepared to say that
this is not correct. In any event, with respect to the
Manufacturers' Representatives or agents for goods
here, the Prime Minister rightly explained that they
will transfer monies to their Head Offices, banks and
so on; but what we have got to do whether in the Op-
position or Government is to keep the cost of living
down as much as we can on essential items. You are
going to amend this to allow any bank to be able to
charge Manufacturers' Representatives more on
their sight drafts for goods which the manufacturers
have given to the agents for a certain period, and the
agents then give to the wholesalers for a certain
period, but no period is given to the shopkeeper,
retailer or the man who buys it in the street.

If you put on one cent more interest, it is passed
on. I took pains out yesterday to discuss this through
and through, and while I am on this, I will say now
when I heard the Prime Minister on the radio and on
television mention that those persons who were
hoarding would be prosecuted, I was very pleased;but
since that I was in Roebuck Street, and I was told that
there was no milk. I will say further to the Hon.
Prime Minister and to the Minister of Agriculture
that I am told that originally 40 cents a case was
made on the very milk that is imported here by the
Pine Hill Dairy, and today $3.00 a case is being made
on it.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: I think the hon. member
should know by now that when I spoke about hoarding
I particularly had the Pine Hill Dairy in mind, and the
Minister of Agriculture as well as the Minister of
Trade have made statements to the effect that evi-
dence had been collected against the Pine Hill Dairy
for hoarding milk, and that we were in the process
of having the necessary summonses issuedwhenthey
sent a message not by jet plane, but certainly by
motor cycle to say that the merchants were happy;
they were releasing the milk. So do not let anybody
in Barbados feel we were afraid to get evidence
against the Pine Hill Dairy and deliver it in the hands
of the Director of Public Prosecution. We have al-
ways made our position clear. It is true that we are
a twenty-five per cent shareholder in the company,


but the company is run as a private company and we
intend to be as vigorous with them as with anybody
else including the banks and Trust houses.

Mr. MOTTLEY: I thank the Hon. Prime Minister,
but I would like to say this: I know that part of what
he said is correct, but I also know of a Roebuck
Street merchant who went up with cash and a police-
man, and that is why they sent down to the Ministry
of Finance to find out what was the position. What I
want to make clear is that the Pine Hill Dairy like
other businesses imports milk. Before the milk was
imported by the Pine Hill Dairy, 40 cents a case was
made by the representatives who imported it; today
$3.00 a case is being made on it, and I challenge
the Minister to get up and deny this. Ten thousand
cases are used each month in Barbados, and I chal-
lenge the Minister to say that if this is raised now,
since they in turn pay their bills like any Manufac-
turers' Representatives, this will not go up.

Mr. Chairman, I saw you meditating when this
statement was being made, because you know above
all people that this is true. As much as I would like
to see the wheels of progress move, Mr. Chairman,
I am not satisfied that any commercial community
wanted this, and even if the commercial community
wanted it, I think what we shouldhearfrom a Social-
ist Government is that their intention would be to
keep this down even if they were amending this in
respect of luxury goods, new motor cars, new re-
frigerators and so on. But that is not what I am think-
ing of; it is food. This is the important thing. If you
want a refrigerator, a car, a television or a radio,
pay for them, because you are not bound to have
these; but not so with food. I am not quite satisfied
that there is this hue and cry, nor am I not satisfied
that money will not be found to pay for goods coming
into this country.

Mr. Chairman, how is the Prime Minister going
to amend the applications from banks to say that the
rate can be 8 per cent, 9 per cent or 10 per cent? I
suspect it is going to be 10 per cent, and I know that
the idea is to press the Prime Minister into making
it 10 per cent. I do not know if it has been put to him
yet, but if this goes to 10percent and 9 1/2 per cent
is being paid as the commercial rate, how on earth
are you going to be able to keep the cost of living
down? This might be all right in respect of luxury
goods, but not in respect of food. People are really
drawing their belts as has been suggested by the
Prime Minister, but I do not think they can draw
them anymore. You might be able to keep it down now,
but I know all that went on about it, though I am not
prepared to represent it on the floor of this House at
this juncture; but it is bound to come. The Prime
Minister knows about it too. It is a good thing that he
stopped this at the time, but do you know that flour
for bread has gone up by $2.00 a bag, and do you know
that at $2.00 a bag more, if you are going to get the
same loaf, it is going to be reduced or the loaf is
going to cost more, and you say the bank is going to
be allowed to charge more interest on this money?
I am not satisfied, commercial community or no
commercial community. What you must bear in mind







1020


,s the edible stuff, and I hope that the Minister of
Agriculture will go and get off this $3.00 and let the
price of milk come back down.
7.00 p.m.

The price of milk had no right up there.

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: On a point of order.
If the hon. member will give way, I will make a
statement. As far as we are concerned, the Milk
Plant is the sole distributor of milk in this country.
When the Milk Plant made representation to us to
increase the price of milk, after devaluation, by 4
a tin, we said "No" because we were satisfied that
what they were making on milk now is sufficient pro -
fit from the consumer in this country, and this Gov-
ernment has no intention whatsoever of increasingthe
price of milk regardless of what the Pine Hill Dairy
says.

Mr. MOTTLEY: I know that the Government has
refused to increase it, but they are still making $3.00
on each case and that is wrong.

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: They are not now get-
thing $3.00, because since devaluation they have to.
pay more for it. They take the milk through the 90-
day or 30-day draft system in the same way as......
(Mr. MOTTLEY: That is wrong.) It is not wrong. It
is correct when I say that they use the same system
as is used by Commission Agents in Bridgetown in
bringing in this milk. They said that they are paying
more money now, since devaluation, for one case of
milk that they were paying before, and they thought
that 40 a tin would compensate them for the additional
amount of money which they had to spend on milk.

We told them that we were not allowing any 4
a tin or not even a 1/24 per tin increase in the price
of milk because we were satisfied that what they are
paying for it now and selling it at the same price as
it had been before devaluation would still give them
a small profit, andwe were not interested in carrying
up the cost of living to the consumer in the country.
That is why we denied them an increase in the price
of milk.

Mr. MOTTLEY: Let me make a point. Theywill
not make a big profit now because they do not have
to import at that price. They are making the profit
on what they have up there. After all, 10,000 cases
of milk in this country is something that the common,
bare foot man has to put in a saucer and put in a box
or larder. Everybody cannot buy milk by the box,
and we have to think of those people. They are selling
the milk that they have to the public now, and that is
what I want you to understand. This is the milk they
have been hoarding and selling at the increased price,
and I say that is wrong. When they are going to im-
port a fresh stock of milk, they will import like the
ordinary, normal importer.

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: On a point of order. The
milk which they have in stock now is milk which they
had on credit and for which they have to pay an in-
creased price.


Mr. MOTTLEY: It cannot be at the increased
rate from New Zealand! New Zealand has not de-
valued her currency.

Several hon. members rose..

Mr. CHAIRMAN: Three hon. members are on
their feet.

Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON: Mr. Chairman, prior
to devaluation most of the milk that arrived in this
country was drawn from most of the importers from
alongside the Wharf. To the small retailer it is
usually stocked at the Pine Hill Dairy. This is why
you will find that it is the small retailer who would
be short of milk, because he usually receives his
milk from the Pine Hill Dairy. (Mr. MOTTLEY: That
is wrong.) It is not wrong.

Mr. Chairman, I am telling the hon. member that
I saw the invoices for the milk. The milk came in
from Belgium on a 60-day Bill of Sight. About thirty
days had elapsed out of the sixty days before devalua-
tion took place, and that is why the Pine Hill Dairy
started to hoard what milk they had in hand so that
they could get increased prices to suit the devalua-
tion. Their argument was that they had lost money
because most of the goods had been sold at the pre-
valuation rate, and now they had to pay Belgium on
the exchange rate because Belgium is one of the
countries which had' not devalued its currency.

Mr. MOTTLEY: I am Dnly saying that the per-
centage of profit which was allowed to the importers
was 400 a case. Why nowallow$3.00? That is wrong.
I challenge anybody to deny this. If you do this, they
will make $2.40 a case.

Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON rose......

Mr. MOTTLEY: No, no, you cannot get up like
this all the time!

Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON: On a point of order.
Prior to the Pine Hill Dairy being the sole importers
of milk, they started to produce milk there and we had
to import small tins of milk because the Pine Hill
Dairy did not make small 6-ounce tins,andwe had to
import milk. They were given the sole......
Mr. MOTTLEY: Mr. Chairman, that was not a
point of order. Allof this I know, and I have kept very
quiet on it. All I am saying is that they should look
into the matter. If the Pine Hill Dairy must make
money, do not let them make it at the expense of the
ordinary, common consumer in this country. This is
not something like a motor car, or a radio, that you
are not bound to have. Ten thousand cases of milk
are imported in this country per month. To make
$3.00 a case on milk is exorbitant andunreasonable.
This is not something to do with tourists; this is not
something to do with the well-to-do people; this is
something that 98.970 of the ordinary working men in
the street must buy. I am not taking up any more
time on this, Sir.

I feel that the commercial community wanted
this, and I feel that as soon as you allow the banks to







1021


increase, then what the hon. Minister said is right. As
normal importers they have to get the 60-day, the
usual fee and so on; they have to give the man in
Roebuck Street 30 days. The bank will put on more on
them. What do you think will happen? Up goes the cost
of living. I am not talking about rum; I am talking
about milk, a most essential item, not rum.

Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Mr. Chairman,some-
times it is very hard to take part in a debate in which
the Prime Minister has treated us to one of his dis-
courteous, roundabout speeches, full of big words and
big concepts. If the truth be told, when he is on his
feet, he understands as little as the Hon. Minister to
whom he is trying to explain something at the moment.
It is very hard to reply to his sort of speeches.

The things that the Prime Minister has said here
in support of this Bill are only really explicable on
the grounds that his heart is not in it. They can only
be explained when you look at their deep confusion
by realising that the Prime Minister does not really
want the rate of interest in Barbados to go up. Even
though it has been pointed out to him by other
speakers on this side a most vital and significant
point that these banks are going to put up their
lending rate without putting up their borrowing rate,
he does not see the point.

In other words, they are going to charge people
more for overdrafts, more for commercial credit,
more for mortgages, even though the Prime Minister
is the only one who does notknowthat the banks lend
money on mortgages on land. The very fault that the
Prime Minister is saying that this Bill will remedy
money fleeing to Trinidad nothing will be done
about it. The Prime Minister is not inthe House, and
there are several things he may not know.

The maximum fixed deposit rate of the banks in
England is two points below the bank rate, so that
the fixed deposit rate in England is 6%. If the banks
in Barbados want to follow the universal banking
practice of the English orNorthern American banks,
it is open to them to put the rate of interest on de-
posits at 6% now. In Trinidad no bankhas been made
to pay 8% on any fixed deposit. That is just a lot of
nonsense.
7.10 p.m.

If in Trinidad people are paying 6 1/2% on fixed
deposits, in Barbados they can do it too; they can
raise it to 8% if they want. That argument, I cannot
say, is not worth the paper it is printed on, because
people do not even reduce that argument to paper.
The Prime Minister knows that when the hon. junior
member for St. Joseph was Minister of Finance, the
identical argument which he has come and put before
the House about their paying higher rate of interest
in Trinidad so that we have to have a higher rate here
to keep the money in Barbados,was put to that Minis -
ter of Finance and he refused to accept it. When the
Prime Minister was in opposition, the same argument
was used to him and he refused to accept it, and he
comes into the House now and tells us the same old
foolishness about money going to Trinidad, the same


nonsense. If money was going to Trinidad, it should
have gone to Trinidad when the bank rate was 7 1/2%
last year. It should have gone then: but that is the
very period of which, in his own Economic Report he
is telling us that bank deposits in Barbados exceeded
bank lending. He talks about this, that if a man has
money at 6%, he may want to lend it out at 8% or
8 1/2%. What is this? A man who has money is not
concerned with whether he is getting 10% from a fixed
deposit rate or from a wey-wey game It is just
amusing childishness. The same argument that he
applied about a man putting money in fixed deposits
at 6% in Barbados and paying Trinidad at 8% applies
right here. You could as well ask why would anybody
put money on fixed deposit or put money in the Sav-
ings Bank when he could carry the money and ask a
Solicitor to lend it out for him at 8%? In fact, people
do that. The Prime Minister knows the word; it is
liquidity preference. He knows the phrase -liquidity
preference. When you put money in the Savings Bank
at 3 1/2%, you can get it out when you want it; when
you put money in a fixed deposit for a year at 6%,
you can get it out at the end of a year. When you put
money out at 8%, you may take a long time to get it
back, and that is why they have different rates of
interest. That is the reason why money is lent out and
borrowed at different prices, because some forms of
investment are safer and more liquid than others, and
forms of investment which are very safe and very
liquid pay and carry a low rate of interest. As to
Treasury Bills in Barbados at 5% or 5 1/2% or what-
ever they are issued at now, you get your money back
in three months, whatever the particular terms of
issue are. Five and a half per cent is all the Gov-
ernment has to pay to borrow money on Treasury
Bills. Why is that? Because at the end of three
months you will get it back. They have to pay more
than the bank pays, because you cannot get it back at
a day's notice, but you do not have to pay as much as
money loaned on land, because they would get it back
at the end of three months. The Prime Minister knows
perfectly well that the reason why some people
choose to invest their money at 6% rather than get
more is because they want to be certain that at a
certain time they can get their money back. The
Prime Minister knows that quite well, and it was
only misleading the House to say that money is
loaned to Trinidad at 8% and 8 1/4%, that a man who
has money is not concerned with whether he is get-
ting 10% from a fixed deposit rate or from a wey-
wey game. That is the greatest economic nonsense
that even the Prime Minister has ever talked in
this House or elsewhere, and Icanonlyassumethat
deep down in his heart he does not really want this
Bill to be passed. He cannot find in his mouth ar-
guments good enough to convince anybody even at
rudimentary standard what interest means and
what rates of interest really are.

Mr. Chairman, on the last occasion when the
Prime Minister talked about this Bill, and he pro-
mised that this Bill would only be an interim
Measure, and he held up to the sky a comprehen-
sive Rate of Interest Bill which would give the
Minister of Financel general powers over rates of in-
terest at that time, he did not give a date as to when







1022


this Bill would be repealed if we pass it now. I think
he mentioned February, but he just talked about if the
bank rate changed down in England. Suppose the
bank rate comes down in the first trading weekofthe
New Yearl On any argument, this Bill should be re-
pealed at once. What would be the point if the bank rate
comes down from 8% it would probably come down to
something like 6 1/2%; but what would the point be of
keeping this Bill in being? Where is the talk about
three months or six months? This Bill really seems
to become a Shibboleth of the Government.They can
pronounce the word, and they want this Hon. House
to pronounce it law in effect. But the very fact that
the urgency that the Prime Minister himself did not
believe in, has proved not to materialise, should
persuade us not to go on with it at this stage. What
possible use can this Bill be other thanthe occasion
on which the English bank rate is at a crisis rate,7%
7 1/2% or 8%? It seems to have mattered nothing
that it has been shown that the Prime Minister's
talk about when the bank rate in England is 8% the
other interest rates are 1/2% and more, is wrong.

Mr. Chairman, I have often said in this House
that we did not come in here to listen to economic
lectures, but it seems that the Prime Minister has
not understood, or if he has understood, he does not
want the members on his side of the House to know.
The bank rate in England is a penal rate.By that it
is meant that bank rate is always above the com-
mercial interest rates. That is what is meant by
bank rate, because it is a penalty which commercial
houses have to pay to the Bank of England when they
loan out more money than they have.That is the bank's
way of keeping the English discount and commercial
houses in order. They are now discounting Bills of
Exchange at 6 1/8%, Ithink. Theydonot raise it the
full amount. What is meant by bank rate is this: 6 1/4
per cent is now the ordinary discount rate and these
are importers and exporters. We are hearing a lot
about 60, 30 and 90 days. Let me tell the Minister
of Trade and the Minister of Agriculture this; they
have it in England too. The exporters who send out
here do not themselves carry the credit. When goods
come here from abroad on a certain credit, the ex-
porters do not keep cash in the bank to carry that
credit to their suppliers any more than the importers
here keep cash in the bank for that credit. They do
not finance all their dollars out of the floating fund
of cash; they have to get their 30, 60 or 90 days fi-
nanced, and they get it financed by discount houses
who buy their bills of exchange suitably discounted.
In other words, with three months' credit, you take
1/4 of the year's percentage rate, of whatever year,
they borrow money on the security of their bills of
exchange and pay the discount rate, which, at pres-
ent, with the bank rate at 8%, is 6 1/4%, and they only
worry their heads about the bank rate if, for some
reason or other, they have loaned out more money
than is available to them, and they need to go to the
bank and ask for more money.

All the while that they are borrowing money from
the Bank of England, that money is being loaned in
Britain on bills of exchange and other bills of se-
curity at 6%, while they are paying bank rate at 8%,


and the bank operates this service and keeps this
control for the purpose of stopping discount houses
from overstretching themselves.
7.20 p.m.

Because all the time they are paying that 1 3/4
per cent to the Bank of England, they are losing 1 3/4
per cent on whatever goods they have loaned out.
Therefore, there is no question of the bank rate being
used as a guide to commercial rate. By definition that
is what the bank rate is about.

If the Prime Minister does not understand that,
he does not understand anything about economics.
This is the point. When you come inhere and you use
the similarity of eight per cent bank rate in England
and eight per cent rate of interest in Barbados, you
deceive persons who are not thinking it out into be-
lieving that the two figures are in some way com-
parable.

Business is not done at eight per cent in England.
Mortgages are not effected at eight per cent in Eng-
land. The Building Society mortgage rate is at 7 1/8
per cent. It has not been even put up with the rise
in the bank rate. There is no demand, Mr. Chairman,
except a long standing generalized demand with banks
in Barbados who find that they are dealing with a
different kind of economic animal. The Barbados
economy is not an economy within reach. The banks
which operate here are accustomed to operating on
their own basis. They have certain rules to follow.
Their deposit rate is put at so much below their over-
draft rate, and so on, and so on. All these things
demand flexibility of the rate of interest.

This is what the banks have in mind and they
continually pressurize those in power, not for ten or
twenty years ago, not in the life time of the Minister
of Finance or of the hon. junior member for StJoseph;
that is something which has been going on in Barbados
ever since the Rate of Interest Act was passed.
Politicians of forty years ago, people who remember
political issues of that period, will remember, when
there was a boom in sugar in 1917 that all of this was
going on then as well. This was during the First
World War. This is a perennial thing in Barbados,
that the owners of money want to be set free from a
fixed rate of interest; but we are a nation of bor-
rowers and for that reason we cannotafforda situa-
tion in which the bank rates are allowed to run fun
and fancy free.

Again, I return to the original point. You will
see overdrafts going upand Iwouldput anything on it,
Mr. Chairman, you will not see your deposit rates
going up in the same proportion as youwill see over-
drafts going up.

The first argument that was pressed on the Prime
Minister was that devaluation and an eight per cent
bank rate by itself meant urgency. The Prime Minis-
ter thought about it. He heard what we had to say about
it and he realized that it was nonsense.

Another argument has now been pressed on him.
In their brand new argument he must have got it







1023


this afternoon he said thatslnce this is the Christ-
mas season that this makes things a little worse than
otherwise. Well, in that case, every year when a
financial crisis has been striking sterling close to
the Christmas season, the Prime Minister ought to
bring one of these Bills in here to raise the bank
rate. That was an afterthought.

Clever men probably cleverer men than the
Prime Minister down in the one single bank in Bar-
bados which has lent out more than it deposits just
one, only one the one bank which has made a valiant
effort to get established here has made a lot of ad-
vances, some of them political. One bank in Barbados
is in this position and it wants to have this whole
argument revived again about raising the bank rate,
and any excuse that comes along is used by that bank.
It is regrettable that it can convince the Minister of
Finance of the Government of Barbados. It is very
regrettable.

Mr. Chairman, we are looking for the construct -
tive measures. If the Prime Minister cannot at the
moment see his way to the operation of a Central
Bank, we are looking for the type of measures that he
promised in connection with the operation of bank
rates. We are not looking for an open licence to the
banks to jack up their interest rate and do as they
like with the people's overdrafts, with merchants'
credits and with such mortgages as they control,and
it is significant that the Prime Ministertalkedabout
it not affecting mortgages.

The particular bank whose advances exceed its
deposits and which I understand it has falsely made a
representation that it has even to borrow money at
eight and one-half per cent to lend out at eight per
cent, that particular bank is the chief bank that lends
money on mortgages short, medium and long term.
They are now trying to make sure that all their mort-
gage business is transferredto a Trust company.They
are now trying to do that, and this particular bank
has many mortgages on its books, but not in the form
of operational accounts that can be charged up, and
not only in that form, Mr. Chairman. That is why this
argument about more money in Trinidad and so on
was being employed.

Mr. Chairman, there is a text book I remember
when I first started to read economics that discussed
rates of interest then, and this was a few years after
Dr. Dalton had tried to bringthe rates of interest in
Britain down to floor level. He had tried to bring
Consols, -Consolidated Government bonds up to
par, L100 Consols would sell for L100. That does not
mean that the economy was in a good state; it meant
that you were trying to bringthe rate of interest down
to nothing. He was trying to bring ordinary Treasury
rates down to 2 1/2 which would have meant that a
commercial rate of 1 /2 per cent was operating. By
the time I came to read economics, the text books
that had been written, commentingonthis, were re-
marking that the commercial rate operating in Britain
was two per cent.
Barbados is in the sterling area. Money could be
loaned in Barbados at six per cent. There were no


political troubles in Barbados at the time such as to
distract investors and yet there was a flight of money
from England to Barbados because you could only get
two per cent on the commercial loans in England and
you would get six per cent in Barbados. Was there
any flight of money here and this state of affairs has
been going on all the time?

I have had to say before that there was a time
when the bank rate in the United Kingdom was 5 1/2
per cent. Were the Americans queueingup at Seawell
to invest money in Barbados? These things, Mr.
Chairman, are being fogged on us because the Prime
Minister believes that all of us in here are like the
majority of those whom he is depending on votes to
pass this Bill. They are so foolish that they cannot
understand economic arguments. He feels that he
needs not bring any argument, and he feels that he
has the majority who would not only pass this Bill
but would say these things and repeat his arguments
as if they understood them, believed them and ac-
cepted them.

I would say this, I was looking at one or two
Cabinet Ministers whom I have heard comment on
this Bill for Party loyalty. Instead, Ifindacceptance
and it disappointed me. They actually believed that
we are not supporting this Bill as a matter of Party
loyalty principle; they were supporting it as a matter
of economic ignorance which, as the Prime Minister
said, took twenty pages, of the Official Gazette of
1958 to report him.

Now, this business of $500,000 monthly leaving
Barbados even before the devaluation- well, a figure
like that you have infected into the debate. It is like
red lights; it is like the Brazilian cable of 1946 to
Barbados. It is like the Post Office Saving Bank
scare in Barbados in 1961 and in England in 1931.
It is one thing that certain political parties have a
keen eye for. It is all disreputable political racket
that has disfigured elections in other countries, and
coming and talking about $500,000 a month is leaving
Barbados! What is that $500,000 a month, Mr. Chair-
man? I have been searching here for figures of in-
visible exports; they are not published in the
Economic Survey, but let us consider. There is a
Hilton Hotel, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Callaghan wants
some money. There are other hotels on the West
Coast owned by North Americans. They want some
money. There are investments in Barbados All that
is money that leaves Barbados. Barbadians invest
abroad as well. There is $75 million in Barbadian
money invested abroad according to Mr. Douglas
Lynch, who, I believe, does have some access to
these types of statistics.
7.30 p.m.

The Government has to repay loans. Where has
this $500,000 a month suddenly just arrived from? In
any case, as the hon. senior member for Christ
Church, the learned members on my right, pointed
out, if there was a flight from Barbados in connection
with the impending devaluation, it has absolutely
nothing to do with the bank rate, because that is not
any transference looking for a better interest rate;







1024


that is a transference looking for a safer place, and
the Prime Minister knows this too. When the flight
from London was on in late October and the beginning
of November, rates of interest in London were ex-
tremely high. Money was running from London to
places where it was getting half the interest it was
earning in London. Interest is not all. There was a
flight from sterling. That was what it was. People
were trying to get out of pounds, irrespective of any
question of rates of interest, and get into dollars or,
in fact, get into evenharder currencies like the Swiss
franc and the German mark. That is what the $500,000
could have been about, or part of it, in addition to or-
dinary remittances. They are not interested in Bank
rates and interest. When you believe that your money
is going to be devalued 14%, you are not fiddling
around with any one per cent,one anda half per cent
or two per cent in interest rates which in any case
only materialise over a year. If you are gambling that
in three weeks' time you are going to get a 15%
capital increment, you are not going to waste time
thinking that in the meantime the money is only 4 1/2
per cent instead of 6 1/2 per cent, and that is only
trying to pull the economic wool over the eyes of the
economic children when the Prime Minister drags
that into a debate.

I understand, Mr. Chairman, that in many ways
he may feel he does not get the help or understanding
in his Cabinet that he would like to expect. That is
his worry and his 'dead', but he should have some re -
spect for hon. members of this House andnot bring in
a lot of irrelevant, nonsensical arguments that if
there happens to be any visiting economist listening
to this debate, he would have to say that if he is as
good a pilot as he is an economist, he had better in-
crease the insurance rates all around. The Prime
Minister is a man of many parts: a musician, pilot,
band conductor, horseman. I look forward to the day
when he tells us howto racehorses around the gar-
rison, and what is more, the Minister of Agriculture
is going to sit down next to him and treat his words
as being words of wisdom. That is all I can say even
in these circumstances.

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: Mr. Chairman, on a
point of order, I should like to drawyour attention to
the irrelevancies being raised by the hon. senior
member for St. Thomas, and according to Standing
Order No. 32, I beg to move that the question be now
put.

Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON: I beg to second that.

Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Mr. Chairman, this is
the first attempt at the closure of debate. I have not
been in Parliament long, but Ihave to tell the Minister
of Agriculture that he is a political tyro.

Mr. CHAIRMAN: In my opinion we have had a lot
of latitude on this Bill. From the Prime Minister back
down has been allowed too much latitude, and I now
have the right to put the question according to Stand-
ing Order No. 32.

The question is that Clause 2 stand part.


Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Mr. Chairman, with
great respect I am on my feet.

Mr. CHAIRMAN: I am at the stage putting the
question according to Standing Order No. 32 which
says:

"After a question has been proposed, aMember
rising in his place may claim to move "That the ques-
tion be now put"; and, unless it appears to the Chair
that such motion is an abuse of the Rules of the House
or an infringement of the rights of the minority, the
question "That the question be now put" shallbe put
forthwith, and decided without amendment or debate
notwithstanding that the mover has had no opportunity
to make his reply.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative,
the Committee dividing as follows:-

AYES: Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON; Hon. E. W.
BARROW; Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS; Hon. C. E.
TALMA; Hon. N. W. BOXILL; Mr. SPRINGER; Mr.
LOWE; Mr. CORBIN; Mr. WEEKESandMr.HOPPIN
10.

NOES: Mr. LYNCH; Mr. HINDS.

Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: On a point of order,
Mr. Chairman, let us have a little respect for par-
liamentary procedure. When even in your experience
have you seen emotion putwhen member was rising
on a point of order?

Mr. CHAIRMAN: If the point of order which the
member is now making was called since a division
has been called, I would hear him; but I am of the
opinion that that point of order did not take place
when the division was called for. Let the Clerk re-
cord the vote.

Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Following what Mr.
Speaker has done wrongly, a point has arisen that if
a division is called, before the voices are taken, any
member may rise on a point of order. I have nothing
more to say on the Bill; soIwill record my vote; but
I do not like you to make a joke of this House, and you
are the biggest joke in here.

Mr. CHAIRMAN: There are no jokes in here at
this particular moment.

NOES: Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Mr. St. JOHN
and Mr. SMITH 5.
On motion of Hon. E. W. BARROW, seconded by Hon.
G. G. FERGUSSON, Mr. CHAIRMAN reported the passing of
one Bill in Committee and Mr. SPEAKER resumedthe Chair
and reported accordingly.
7.40 p.m.

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: Mr. Speaker, I beg to
move that the Bill be now read the third time.



Hon. C. E. TALMA: I beg to second that.







1025


The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.


Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: Mr. Speaker, I beg to
move that this Bill do now pass.

Hon. C. E. TALMA: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative,
the House dividing as follows:-

AYES: Mr. YEARWOOD; Hon'bles E. W. BARROW
C. E. TALMA, A. DaC. EDWARDS, G. G. FERGUSSON
N. W. BOXILL, Messrs. SPRINGER, LOWE, CORBIN,
WEEKS and HOPPIN 11.

NOES: Messrs. LYNCH, HINDS, J. M. G. M.
ADAMS, St. JOHN and SMITH 5.

Mr. SPEAKER: I declare that the "Ayes" have it,
and this Bill is duly passed.

Now the next Order of the Day is Order No.3.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: Mr. Speaker, the next
Order of the Day under Government Businesswillbe
a Bill to amend the Income Tax Act, 1921, to make
provision for the taxation of unit trusts and so on.

Mr. SPEAKER: The Hon. and Learned Prime
Minister is asking that Item No. 4 be the next Order
of the Day.

Hon. E. W. BARROW: Mr. Speaker, Iwas saying
that the only remaining Order was OrderNo.4. I am
sorry, Sir. The remaining Orders are Nos. 3,4 and 7.
In any event, what I have risen in my place to say is
that I do not intendto proceedwithOrders Nos. 3 and
4 at today's sitting. The Hon. MinisterofAgriculture
is not proceeding with Order No. 9at today's sitting,
and therefore the only outstanding Orders will be
Orders Nos. 7 and 8. We understandthat some mem-
bers on the other side would like to get away.


Mr. St. JOHN: You mean, members on your side.
That is a false statement.



Hon. E. W. BARROW: My information was in-
correct. Some hon. members feel that they have been
sitting long enough, and I would like to accommodate
them. I am merely indicating the Orders thatI am not
prepared to go on with today; Orders Nos. 3, 4 and 9,
I beg to move that Order No. 7 be the next Order of
the Day.



Mr. SPEAKER: The Hon. and Learned Prime
Minister is seeking to proceedwithOrderNo.7 as the
next Orderof the Day. Ifthere is no objection the Hon.
and Learned Prime Minister may proceed. I hear
no objection and, therefore, the Hon. and Learned
Minister may proceed.
7.50 p.m.


RESOLUTION re "CIVIL ESTABLISHMENT
(GENERAL) (AMENDMENT)
(No.ll) ORDER 1967"

Hon. E. W. BARROW: Mr. Speaker, this Order
arises from the regrading of the post of Magistrate
from x3 -xl ($5,580 9,000) to X.2 1 ($6,300 -
9,000). This is because of the difficulty which is being
experienced in recruiting and retaining personnel in
the Magisterial service at the existing salary attached
to the post of Magistrate ($5,580 9,000). What we
are doing is leaving the maximum where it is, but
shortening the scale from I think there were some-
thing like 13 increments; but there was a very long
scale, and there were a lot of complaints about the
length of this scale by judicial officers, and therefore
the scale is being shortened so that the minimum
salary is $6,300 and the maximum remains where it is


As to the Crown Law Officers, the post of As-
sistant Crown Counsel is being regraded from G. 6A
($4,320) to G. 6A: G. 5-4 ($4,320 4,680; 4,860 -
5,940). The post of Assistant Crown Counsel ($4,320-
4,680) was recently created to replace the post of
Cadet/Administrative Assistant ($4,320 4,680:
4,860 5,940) formerly assignedto the Legal De-
partment, and it is now proposed to restore the parity
with the post which existed before.

The third part of the Order is in relation to the
upgrading of the post of Steward of the Prisons from
$2,880 3,960 to $2,880 4,680, and to upgrade the
post of Chief Matron from $3,420 3,780 to $3,960 -
seek to correct two anomalies arising out of the 1966
Salaries Revision. It is proposed to restore the pre-
revision relationship between the post of Steward
and Chief Officer and between the present holder of
the post of Chief Matron and the post of First Class
Officer. I therefore beg to move that this Resolution
do now pass.

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: I beg to second that.

Mr. St. JOHN: Mr. Speaker, while we on this
side of the House recognize the difficulty that has been
experienced in Barbados in attracting Magistrates at
the Salary Scale with its long grade service, what has
happened now is that, as a result of the juggling with
the number of points in the scale, and by reducing
the scale with respect to Magistrates, you are creat-
ing another anomaly. The other anomaly is that you
have your Crown Counsel and your Deputy Registrar
to the same grade, all requiring basically the same
qualifications; but the people who drafted the Order
did not realise that if you do not change the salary
scale with respect to these officers who were on a par
with the Magistrates, you will not be creating a
shortage in the Attorney General's Office, in the of-
fice of the Director of Public Prosecutions and in the
office of the Registrar. What will happen now is that
these officers will apply for transfers over to the
Magisterial Service. That is exactly what is goingto
happen. The people who have been Crown Counsel in
the past are now going to applytogo over to the Ma-
gisterial Service and therefore your shortagewillbe








1026


there. As a result of this Order, you may alleviate
the position with respect to the Magistrates, but com-
parable officers in the Attorney General's Office and
in the Office of the Directorof Public Prosecutions, -
these Crown Counsel will still have the same long
scale; they will still have to start at the bottom and
go right up, and theywillwant to become Magistrates.
Therefore you will have that difficulty.

I cannot understand how the Attorney General and
the Cabinet approved this when their own Legal Of-
ficers, people who were acting as Magistrates before,
who moved from the Magisterial Service into the
Attorney General's Department as Crown Counsel,
will be worse off than whentheywere inthe jobthey
have left purely because this Order only applies to
Magistrates in the Judiciary. What about the Deputy
Registrars? What is going to happenwiththem? They
have to go through the whole long scale. Another
anomaly will be created because the people who are
responsible for this Order do not seem to understand
fully the implications, that if you have (ASIDES)... I
am talking about the post of Crown Counsel, the Of-
ficers who are on a par with the Magistrates. If you
look at the back of the Estimates you will see that
Magistrates, Crown Counsel and Deputy Registrars
were all on one grade, and when it was proposed to
shorten the scales for the Magistrates, everybody
understood that they were going to be a generalised
shortening of the scale so that you would not seek to
create an anomaly. Youwouldfindit in the Estimates.
If you look at Appendix Binthe Estimates 1967-68 at
page 5 you will see from X.3 X.1 that Magistrate,
Crown Counsel and Deputy Registrar, the same type
of people are attracted to the same office. What they
have done is that they have created a differential
there, so. that all the Deputy Registrars will want to
become Magistrates and your Crown Counsel will
want to go over. It is realized that the Director of
Public Prosecutions' Office and the Attorney Gen-
eral's Office seek to attract to the posts those who
have talent. Mark mywords; youwillget protests and
dissatisfaction. There will be a wave of applications
from the Office of Crown Counsel to go over to the
Magisterial Service.

The question that this Resolution do now pass was put
and resolved in the affirmative without division.

8.00 p.m.

WIDOWS AND CHILDREN PENSION BILL,1967

Hon. E. W. BARROW: This is a very short Bill,
Sir, which affects some families of Local Government
Officers and it is Order No. 8 on the Order Paper. I
am asking leave that Order No. 8 be the next Order
of the Day.

Mr. SPEAKER: Automatically, it is the next
Order of the Day and it is in the name of the Hon.
and Learned Prime Minister. It is to move the
second reading of a Bill to amend the Widows and
Children Pension Act, 1963.
There being no objection, leave was granted the Hon.
Prime Ministe r.


Hon. E. W. BARROW: Mr. Speaker, this Bill af-
fects the dep-ndents of Local Government officers
who on the 1st day of April, 1966, became employed
in the Public Service andliable to make contributions
under the Widows and Children Pension Act of 1964-5.
Contributions have already been deducted from their
salaries.

But these officers have elected not to come under
the provisions of the Pensions Act of 1947 by virtue
of Section 93 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous
Provisions) Act of 1966-5 and they are not therefore
entitled let us say, their dependents are not entitled
- to such pensions by virtue of the operation of Section
6 of the Widows and Children Pension Act of 1963.

There are two fairly short sections to the Act.
The first one is the citation and the second section
makes provision that if any person to whom this Act
applies by virtue of Section 3 (1) B, if under Section
9 (3) of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Pro-
visions) Act of 1966, elected not to come under the
Pension Act of 1947, then, in the case of any such per-
son, references in this Act to the Pension Act or to
the Pension Regulations, shall be construed as refer-
ences to the enactment in relation to any pension,
gratuity, or allowance which may be granted to or in
respect of such pension applicable to such persons
immediately before the 1st April, 1966, and referen-
ces to the particular provision of the Pensions Act
or the Pensions Regulations shall be construed as
references to the corresponding provisions of such
enactments.

Although this is a long section, it is a compara-
tively simple one. According to Section 2 (1B) of the
Widows and Children Act, 1963, although these of-
ficers have elected not to come under the pension
Act of 1947, by the 1963 Acttheywill still be required
to pay contributions to the Pension Scheme, yet ac-
cording to that Act they still do not become eligible
for pension; so this Act is in truth and fact differing
from that as far as these officers are concerned. They
are quite a few of them.

We are amending the 1963 Act to make it possi-
ble to pay pensions to the widows and the dependent
children surviving any such officers. It is simple and
straightforward, and this merely corrects an ano-
maly which existed as a result of the taking over of
Local Government in 1966. I therefore beg to move,
Sir, that this Bill be now read a second time.

Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: I beg to second that.

The question was put and resolved in the affirmative
without division.

On motion of Hon. E. W. BARROW, seconded by Hon.
A. DaC. EDWARDS, Mr. SPEAKER left the Chair and the
House went into Committee on the Bill, Mr. YEARWOOD in
the Chair.
Clauses 1 and 9 were called and passed.
On motion of Hon. E. W'. BARROW,seconded by Hon.
A. DaC. EDWARDS, Mr. CHAIR4AN reported the passing
of one Bill in Committee.







1027


Mr. SPEAKER resumed the Chair and reported accor-
dingly.

On motion of Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS, seconded by
Hon. C. E. TALMA, the Bill was read a third time and
passed.
SEASON GREETINGS

Hon. E. W. BARROW: Mr. Speaker, that closes
Government Business for the day.

Before I formally move the adjournment of the
House, I think it is customary at this time of the year
for the person responsible for Government Business
to lead off a round of congratulatory and felicitous
remarks to Your Honour and the members of the staff
who have served us so well during the past twelve
months.
8.10 p.m.


We have had our differences. When I say "we",
I do not mean that I have engaged in any personal
attacks either on the Chair, and, I hope, not on the
members of the Staff of this Chamber, but there have
been differences over matters of procedure across
the floor of the House, over the heads of the Officers
of the House, through the minds of the Officers, never,
I hope, over the head of Your Honour or the Deputy
Speaker or the Chairman of Committees. Everything
has been noted, and we have managed to keep the ship
on even keel althoughwe have been through some very
stormy waters.

I do not want to introduce anything acrimonious.
I think I am entitled to be heard even on an occasion
like this without unnecessary interruption from either
side of the House, Mr. Speaker.

There is a lot that one could say on a different
occasion. We have our opinions on certain matters,
but there is one characteristic of all democratic
Christian communities such as ours, and it is that at
one particular time of the year we do manage to see
some saving graces even in those persons whom we
may not only not entertain within our concepts of
friendship, but even whom we may actually dislike.
Such a stricture, of course, could never apply to Your
Honour or any of the Officers of this House, because
you and they have all been trying to do a job under the
most trying circumstances the Legislature has ever
perhaps encountered; and it is in that spirit and in
appreciation of the long and arduous hours which have
been put in in this Chamber inthe conducting of peo-
ple's business, that I have very great pleasure on be-
half of the members of the Government in offering the
compliments of the Season to Your Honourandto the
members of the Staff of the Chamber.

I hope that at a suitable time before the Season
is passed, the members will have the opportunity for
some conviviality either at Your Honour' s expense or
at the expense of the Staff or both. We are not often
the recipients of the benefaction of members of this
community, and I think the members here assembled
will all appreciate if somebody remembered us at


Christmas time and entertained us 'for a change',
and we are looking forward for such an invitation
either from Your Honour orfrom the members of the
Staff or from both jointly or separately. Having thrown
out that invitation to be invited, I think I can do nothing
better than to assure Your Honour of the utmost co-
operation from our side of the House in the coming
year, and of strict observance of the Rules and pro-
cedures by which our deliberations are ordained, and
we hope that we will have a much happier time both
inside and outside of the Chamber in the year 1968.

I beg to move that this House do now adjourn until
Tuesday, 16th January, 1968, at 2.30 p.m.

Mr. St. JOHN: Mr. Speaker, if Imay be permitted
we on this side of the House would like to extend to
Your Honour and to the Staff of this House all that is
customary at this time of the year. We do so sincerely
We even would like to extend the same thing to the
other side. I notice thatwas a significant omission by
the last speaker, but we on this side are accustomed
to that. As next year, I understand, is a Leap Year,
I do not knowwhether between now and then there may
be any change in the status of any of us, but in case
that should occur, we on this side of the House would
be extremely happy, and we lookforward nextyear to
Your Honour and the other members of the Staff
coming here with renewed energy and renewed
stimulus to preside over our proceedings and to see
that the Rules are carried out by all and sundry.

I beg to second the motion for the adjournment.

Mr. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I must rise, Sir, to
congratulate you for the splendid way in which you
have conducted the meetings of this House over the
last twelve months, and now that we are coming to a
very joyous time of the year where each and every
one of us will be expected to make full use of some-
thing or another in a liquid form, whetheritbe al-
coholic or otherwise, I congratulate you beforehand,
and as my colleague has referredto nextyear being a
Leap Year, I am quite willing and I am offering my
services to be named godfatherforanythingthat con-
cerns you during the year. I am wishing everyone
a happy Christmas and a prosperous New Year, and I
am goingto do something for the Government that they
have not done for us, because the Hon. Prime Minister
did not mention anything about the Opposition by wish-
ing us at least the compliments of the Season. I am
going to wish them all that is good, and I am thanking
them ever so much for granting me my request
through which we can become happy citizens on Lam-
mings Land. On behalf of the people of St. Joseph, I
thank the Government forwhat they have done with re-
spect to the purchase of Lammings and giving us a
small City in the North. As soon as Coggins Bridge
has been erected, I will myself carry down the cham-
pagne and burst a fewbottles onthatbridge. (Cheers)

Hon. E. W. BARROW: Mr. Speaker, onapoint of
explanation, it is not customary and I would not like
members on the opposite side to think that I do not
wish them too a merry Christmas, and Iwas making
a motion on behalf of the House towards the Staff and







1028


yourself; but I should like to assure both hon. mem-
bers on the other side who have spokenthat such fe-
licitations extend to them equally as to the members
of the Staff and to Your Honour.

Mr. LYNCH: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of this sec-
tion of the Opposition, I would very much like to
felicitate you and to wish you the compliments of the
Season. I would also regard it as a pleasure and a
duty to extend the same compliments to the hard-
working Staff of this House. You can be assured, Mr.
Speaker, that any attacks upon you from this quarter
of the House would be only on your hospitality.
8.20 p.m.

On behalf of my colleague, who is not in his place,
and myself, I would like to extend the compliments
of the season to all members of this House, and we
do hope, Sir, that you will return like a giant re-
freshed with wine to preside over our deliberations
when we return in the New Year.

Mr. CORBIN: Mr. Speaker, I could not go home
tonight without congratulating you for the patience you
have endured in this House of Assembly for the last
year. I thank you foryourhospitality, your aspiration
and your generosity. I must say that at certain times
your passion may have been strained, but you would
not allow it to break the bonds of our affection. You
try to stand in this House as a father who has chil-
dren. I know how much trials you have had from time
to time. We have come to the end of this year; we have
to depart from one another for a few weeks. I trust,
Sir, that you will enjoy your stay, and I also trust


that the peace of God which passeth all understanding
will keep your heart and mind through Jesus Christ.

Mr. SPEAKER: I am more than grateful to hon.
members and almost overwhelmed by their kind
wishes. I thank the Hon. Prime Minister, andthe hon.
Deputy Leader of the Opposition, that very senior
member of the Opposition, who has already completed
.1 years' service as amemberof this House, and the
hon. junior member for Bridgetown. I shall convey to
the staff the good Christmas wishes and wishes, for
the New Yearwhich have been expressed and, on their
behalf, I thank hon. members who have expressed
those good wishes.

In view of what has been said tonight, and in view
of the general manner in which we got on today, at
least when I was in here, it makes me wish that
Christmas would come more often the spiritwhich
has in the main prevailed today.

Again I thank hon. members. But, before I adjourn
the meeting, I want to discharge, with my thanks, the
members of the Select Committee who were appointed
to consider and report on the Billto revise the statute
law of the Island by repealing obsolete, spent, un-
necessary or superseded enactments. I thank those
hon. members for their services on that Committee,
and I now formally discharge them.
The question that this House do now adjourn until Tues-
day, 16th January, 1968, at 2.30 p.m. o'clock, was putand
resolved in the affirmative without division, and Mr.
SPEAKER adjourned the House accordingly.
8.25 p.m.






Statutory Instrument Supplement No. 28
Supplement to Official Gazette No. 40 dated 16th May, 1968.


S.I. 1968 No. 61
The Miscellaneous Controls Act, 1958
ORDER MADE BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY
UNDER SECTION (4) (1) (c) OF THE MIS-
CELLANEOUS CONTROLS ACT, 1958
This Order may be cited as the Miscellaneous
Controls (Control of Prices) (Amendment) (No. 13)
Order, 1968.

2. The Schedule to the Control of Prices (De-
fence) Order 1942, as contained in the Miscellaneous
Controls (Control of Prices) (Amendment) (No. 12)
Order, 1966 is hereby further amended by deleting all
the words, occurring in the columns marked "WHOLE-
SALE PRICE" and "RETAIL PRICE" in respect of
the Article "ONIONS" and substituting therefor the
following:-


WHOLESALE PRICE RETAIL PRICE
ARTICLE
(not more than) (not more than)


Onions $14.71 per bag of
55 lb. 35t per lb.


Made by me the aforesaid Competent Authority this
fourteenth day of May, one thousand nine hundred and
sixty-eight.

F. A. MOORE
Competent AuthoritN.







2 STATUTORY INSTRUMENT

S.I. 1968 No. 62

The Miscellaneous Controls Act, 1958

ORDER MADE BY THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY
UNDER SECTION (4)(1) (c) OF THE MISCEL-
LANEOUS CONTROLS ACT, 1958
This Order may be cited as the Miscellaneous
Controls (Control of Prices) (Amendment) (No. 14)
Order, 1968.

2. The Schedule to the Control of Prices (De-
fence) Order 1942, as contained in the Miscellaneous
Controls (Control of Prices) (Amendment) (No. 12)
Order, 1966, is hereby further amended by deleting all
the words occurring in the columns marked "WHOLE-
SALE PRICE" and "RETAIL PRICE" in respect of
the Article BEEF CORNED "Fray Bentos" and
substituting therefore the following:-


ARTICLE WHOLESALE PRICE RETAIL PRICE
(not more than) (not more than)

BEEF-CORNED:
"Fray Bentos" $19.25 per carton of
24 x 12 oz. tins 88t per 12 oz
tin.

$27.49 per carton of
48 x 7 oz. tins 63t per 7 oz. tin


Made by me the aforesaid Competent Authority
this fifteenth day of May, one thousand nine hundred
and sixty-eight.

F. A. MOORE
Competent Authority.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs