PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
BRIDGETOWN, BARBADOS, 26TH DECEMBER, 1968
TABLE OF CONTENTS
\, Gazette Notices
Executorial: Isabelle Mary Ford..............
Land Acquisition Act: Re land in parish of Saint
Michael for the Fishing Industry............
Re land in parish of Saint James for the purpose
of providing a right of way to the beach....
Statement of Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce 1136-
House of assembly Debates for 26th arch, 968
House of Assembly Debates for 26th March, 1968.
NOTICE NO. 972 (second publication)
Re Estate cf
ISABELLE MARY FORD
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that all per-
'Isons having any debt or claim upon or affect-
ing the Estate of Isabelle Mary Ford late of
15 Stanford Road, Norbury, London, S.W. 16,
England, who died at 15 Stanford Road,
Norbury, London, S.W. 16, England on the
23rd day of January 1968, are hereby re-
quested to send particulars of their claims
duly attested to Barclays Bank D.C.O. at
Roebuck Street, Bridgetown, Barbados on or
before the 16th day of January 1969, after
which date we shall proceed to distribute the
assets of the estate among the parties en-
titled thereto having regard to the debts and
claims only of which we shall then have had
notice; and that we shall not be liable for as-
sets so distributed to any person of whose
debt or claim we shall not have had notice at
the time of such distribution.
And all persons indebted to the said Es-
tate are requested to settle their accounts
Dated this 14th day of November, 1968
BARCLAYS BANK LIMITED
Executors of the will of
Isabelle Mary Ford, deceased
by their Constituted Attorney on record.
BARCLAYS BANK D.C.O.
December 26, 1968
BANK OF COMMERCE
N. J. McKINNON, LL.D.
J. P. R. WADSWORTH H. W. THOMSON
L. G. GREENWOOD
E. C. GILL, LL.D., F.S.A. HON. ROB
AUBREY W. BAILLIE
J. D. BARRINGTON, B.A.Sc.
GEORGE M. BLACK, JR.
HENRY BORDEN, C.M.G., Q.
J. A. BOYD
HON. JoHN V. CLYNE
RALPH W. COOPER
PETER D. CURRY, LL.D.
IAN D. DAVIDSON, C.E.E.
NELSON M. DAVIS
JOHN J. DEUTSCH,
M. A. EAST
R. FRASER ELLIOTT,
Q.C., B.Com., M.B.A.
ALBERT L. FAIRLY, JR.,
P. M. Fox, D.C.L., D.Sc.F.
A. P. FRAME, D.Sc.
HORACE J. FRASER,
Ph.D., P.Eng. (Ontario)
ELIOT S. FROSST
ALLAN GRAYDON, Q.C.
SYDNEY M. HERMANT
EDGAR L. HICKMAN
F. MARGUERITE HILL,
M.A., M.D., F.R.C.P.(C)
REED O. HUNT
W. M. CURRIE
ERT H. WINTERS,
LL.D., D.Eng., D.Sc.
Chairman, Bowes Company Limited Toronto
Director, The Algoma Steel Corporation, Limited Toronto
Director, Argus Corporation Limited Toronto
Director, Brazilian Light and Power Company Limited Toronto
Vice-Chairman, Canadian Marconi Company Toronto
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
MacMillan Bloedel Limited Vancouver
President, Cooper Construction Company
(Eastern) Limited Hamilton
President, Peter D. Curry & Co. Ltd. Winnipeg
Chairman, The Western Assurance Company Toronto
Chairman, N. M. Davis Corporation Limited Toronto
Principal and Vice-Chancellor, Queen's University Kingston
President, John East Iron Works Limited Saskatoon
Stikeman, Elliott, Tamaki, Mercier &r Robb Montreal
Hollinger Consolidated Gold Mines, Limited Montreal
The Great Lakes Paper Company Limited Montreal
Director, Columbian Carbon (Canada) Ltd. Toronto
President and Managing Director,
Falconbridge Nickel Mines Limited Toronto
Director, Canada Permanent Trust Company Montreal
Blake, Cassels & Graydon Toronto
President, Imperial Optical Company Ltd. Toronto
President and Managing Director,
A. E. Hickman Co. Limited St. John's, Nfld.
Physician-in-Chief, Women's College Hospital Toronto
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer,
Crown Zellerbach Corporation San Francisco
113 O F _' _A E
December 26. 1968
G. R. HUNTER,
M.B.E., Q.C., LL.B.
M. E. JONES, Q.C., LL.B.
H. J. LANG, P.Eng.
J. D. LEITCH
A. J. MACINTOSH, Q.C., LL.B
M. W. MACKENZIE, C.M.G., C.A.
HON. GEORGE C. MARLER,
P.C., M.L.C., B.C.L., LL.D.
T. M. MAYBERRY
Partner, Pitblado, Hoskin & Company
A Senior Partner, Chambers, Saucier, Jones,
Peacock, Black, Gain and Stratton
Chairman and President, Canron Limited
Chairman, Maple Leaf Mills Limited
Managing Director, Ciments Lafarge S.A.
Partner, Blake, Cassels & Graydon
Director, International Milling Company, Inc.
Lafarge Cement Quebec Ltd.
Director, Firestone Tire & Rubber
Company of Canada Limited
JOHN A. McDOUGALD Chairman and President, Crown Trust Company Toronto
THE RT. HON. LORD MCFADZEAN Chairman (Executive),
British Insulated Callender's Cables Limited London, England
W. F. McLEAN
ALLEN A. McMARTIN
ANDR9 MONAST, Q.C.
J. H. MOORE, F.C.A.
GRAHAM MORROW, O.B.E.
J. GEOFFREY NOTMAN,
HON. ANGUS J. B. OGILVY
HARRY F. OPPENHEIMER,
M.A., D.Econ., LL.D.
JEAN P. W. OSTIGUY
T. O. PETERSON
MAJ.-GEN. HON. E. C. PLOW,
C.B.E., D.S.O., C.D., D.C.L.
GEORGE T. RICHARDSON,
J. E. RICHARDSON, LL.B.
ROBERT G. ROGERS
ROBERT C. SCRIVENER
J. D. SIMPSON
J. HERBERT SMITH, D.Sc.
A. A. THORNBROUGH,
President, Canada Packers Limited Toronto
Hollinger Consolidated Gold Mines. Limited Bermuda
Monast, Desmeules & Walters Quebec
Chairman and President, John Labatt Limited London
Director, The Western Assurance Company Toronto
Director, Canadair Limited Montreal
Guardian Assurance Company, Limited London, England
Chairman, Anglo American Corporation Johannesburg,
of South Africa. Limited South Africa
President, Morgan, Ostiguy & Hudon Ltd. Montreal
Chairman, The Investors Group Winnipeg
Province of Nova Scotia Halifax
President and Chief Executive Officer,
Noranda Mines Limited Toronto
James Richardson & Sons, Limited Winnipeg
President and Chief Executive Officer.
British Columbia Telephone Company Vancouver
President and Chief Executive Officer,
Crown Zellerbach Canada Limited Vancouver
President, Bell Canada Montreal
Chairman, Placer Development, Limited Vancouver
Canadian General Electric Company Limited Toronto
President, Massey-Ferguson Limited Toronto
December 26, 1968
0Q0 N IN '0
00 0 00 0
'0 0N 0
N m "<
00 C- Ut
~hN N N
-< C<, v
N: ON 0
N-- 00 N
CU' 04 0' -
o 0' 00 C-
O^o oO rc
N^ N 0 (N
I C C-
i i ..
C 1 *
I 1 l
5 0 *
U 4 -
u H c. M
-3 U 0
S3 U & S
o5 a o
O ,P C- Cd
C ia "
.0 0 .
December 26, 1968
STATEMENT OF .REVENUE, EXPENSES AND
For the financial year ended October 31, 1968
Income from loans - - $328,456,278
Income from securities - 115,623,272
Other operating revenue - 59,663,064
Total revenue - - 503,742,614
Interest on deposits - 238,050,006
Salaries, pension contributions and other staff
benefits - - 105,165,687
Property expenses, including depreciation 28,725,120
Other operating expenses, including provi-
sion for losses on loans based on five-
year average loss experience 35,573,281
Total expenses - 407,514,094
Balanceofrevenue- - --- 96,228,520
Appropriation for losses - - 27,600,000
Balance of profits before income taxes 68,628,520
Provision for income taxes relating thereto 35,700,000
Balance of profits for the year - 32,928,520
Dividends - - - 19,858,800
Amount carried forward- - --- 13,069,720
Undivided profits at beginning of year 3,182,017
Transfer from accumulated appropriations for
losses - - - -
Transferred to Rest account - 15,000,000
Undivided profits at end of year - $ 1,251,737
STATEMENT OF REST ACCOUNT
For thefinancial year ended October 31, 1968
Balance at beginning of year - $260,000,000 $245,000,000
Transfer from undivided profits - 15,000,000 15,000,000
Balance at end of year - - $275,000,000 $260,000,000
L. G. GREENWOOD G. R. SHARWOOD
President Chief General Manager
I rI I n vI u m 1 9
NOTICE NO. 1063 (second publication)
LANQ ACQUISITiON ACT, 1949
(NWtice under Section 3)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that it ap-
pears to the Minister responsible for Lands
that the parcel of land described in 'the
Schedule hereto and situate in the parish of
Saint Michael is likely to be needed for pur-
poses which.in the opinion of the Minister are
public purposes: namely, for the fishing In-
AIl. THAT certain piece or parcel of
land situate in the parish of Saint Michael-and
containing by estimation 6,000 square feet of
land at Pile Bay, Saint Michael, Abutting and
Bounding on East and West on lands of the
Crown, on the South on the sea and on the
North on the Public Road or however else the
same may abut and bound.
Dated this 12th day of December One
Thousand nine hundred and sixty-eight at
Government Headquarters, Bay Street, in the
parish of Saint Michael in this Island of Bar-
A. W. SYMMONDS
Ministry of Home Affairs.
Deosrnbir 26, 11P6P
NOTICE.NQ.'1065 (second public ibn).
SAND ACQUISITL.QN 'ACT,1949
S (Notice underecticon 3)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN'that it ap-'
pears 'to-the Minister responsible for Landti
that the; parcel of land described in' the'
Schedule hereto and situate in the parish of.
Saint Jame,s is likely td,'beneeded for, pi:r-
poses which in the opinion of th6 Minister. are
.pub)i' purposes: namely, fbi the purpose, of
providing a right of way td thli'beach.
ALL'THAT certain, piece or parcel of
land situate in the parish of Sia'ntt James cor-
raining by estimation 891!,sqqare feet 'or
thereeabouts Abutting and Bbundiing on lands
of A. Browne, on the public road'o n. 1.nds.of
the Barbados Electric Cqrporattion:and on
the sea or however else the saine may abut
Dated this 12th day of memberr One
Thousand nine hundred and; si*tyt-ight at
Government Headquarters,'~Bay Strieet, 'in the
parish of Saint Michael in'this Island,of Bar-
Government Printing Office.
A. W. SYMMONDSPS
Ministry of Hoile Affairb.
House of Assembly Debates
SECOND SESSION OF 1966 71
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
Tuesday, 26th March, 1968
Pursuant to the adjournment, the House of As-
sembly met at 2.45 p.m. o'clock today.
His Honour J. E. T. BRANCKER, Q.C., F.Z.S..,
(Speaker); Mr. L. E. SMITH, J.P.; Mr. E. D. MOTTLEY, C.B.E.,
J.P.; Hon. C. E. TALMA, (Minister of Health and Community
Development); (Hon. J. C. TUDOR, M.A., (Leader of theHouse);
Mr. J. W. CORBIN; Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON, (Minister of Trade,
Tourism, Co-operatives and Fisheries); Mr. R. ST.C. WEEKES,
J.P.; Mr. W. R. LOWE; Hon. N. W. BOXILL, (Minister of Com-
munications and Works); Mr. J. B. YEARWOOD, (Chairman of
Committees); Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS, (Minister of Agriculture,
Labour and National Insurance); Mr. W. C. B. HINDS; Mr. L. S.
CRAIG; Mr. H. B. ST. JOHN, LL.B., and Mr. J. M. G. M.
Prayers were read.
REQUEST BY Hon. J.C. TUDOR
Hon. J.C. TUDOR: Mr. Speaker, I am goingto ask
Mr. Chaplain to circulate his prayers so thatwe may
study them after. I need not say any more.
Mr. MOTTLEY: Sir, Iam supportingthat because
it is very rare that we get that.
Mr. SMITH: If I am in order, Sir, I am aware that
the Leader of the House was serious when he asked
that because certain hon. members would not return
in here after they read that prayer.
Mr. SPEAKER: I would convey the request to Mr.
Mr. SPEAKER: The Minutes of the meeting of
Wednesday, 6th March, 1968, have been circulated, I
am informed. Unless there is any objection, I declare
that these Minutes will be confirmed. (A PAUSE).
Hearing no objection, I declare the Minutes of the
meeting of 6th March this year to be duly confirmed.
LETTER OF THANKS
Mr. SPEAKER: I have the honour to inform the
House that I have received a letter dated the 18th
March, this year, from Mrs. Wilkinson,widow of the
late John Hadley Wilkinson, thanking hon. members for
sending her a copy of the Resolution which was passed
by the House on the 6th March on the occasion of the
death of her husband. She says that this copy was very
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the
Hon. and Learned Prime Minister, Minister of Finance
and Minister of External Affairs, I am commanded to
lay the Barbados (Overseas Officers Retirement and
Compensation) Regulations, 1968.
Also, the Pensions (Amendmant) Regulations,
And also, The Civil Establishment (General)
(Amendent) (No. 2) Order, 1968.
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Speaker,on behalf of the
Hon. and Learned Prime Minister, Minister of Finance
and Minister of External Affairs, I beg to give notice
of a Resolution to approve the Civil Establishment
(General) (Amendment) (No. 2) Order, 1968.
Also, on my ownbehalf, a Bill to amend the So-
licitors' Act, 1896, and to declare my intention to ask
leave of the House later in today's meeting to deal with
this Bill in all of its stages, copies of which will be
circulated to hon. members immediately.
NOTICE OF ORAL REPLY
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Speaker, also to say that
Oral Reply to Question No. 148, asked by the Hon. and
Learned senior member for St. Thomas is ready.
PRIVATE MEMBERS' NOTICES
Mr. SPEAKER: There are, I understand, certain
Questions which were handed in on Thursday of last
week that is, well in time, by the hon. senior member
for St. Joseph. I am advised that those Questions have
not yet been fully processed. I give the undertaking,
assuming they are ready at any time during the course
of this meeting, that the hon. senior member for St.
Joseph will have my permission to give notice of those
Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. senior member for St.
James. His Question re certain persons or firms be-
ing granted the facility of renting lots in the new car
Mr. CRAIG: Mr Speaker, to enquire of the appro-
Is the Minister aware that certain persons or
firms (other than persons connected with diplomatic
representatives of foreign countries) have been grant-
ed the facility of renting lots in public car parks in
Bridgetown upon a monthly basis?
Does the Minister consider this practice to be in
interest of the travelling public?
Will the Minister see to it that an end is put to this
Mr. SPEAKER: The same hon. member. His
Question re compulsory acquisition of land.
Mr. CRAIG: Mr. Speaker, to enquire of the appro-
Will Government acquire compulsorilyy or other-
wise ) the lands adjacent to the St. Judes Mixed School,
St. George, for the purpose of providing a playing field
for the inhabitants of the area?
Mr. SPEAKER: The same hon. member. His
Question re ia playing field.
Mr. CRAIG: Mr. Speaker, to enquire of the appro-
Is the Minister aware that there is no playing field
at or near Bourne's Village in the parish of St. George?
Will the Minister see to it that such a playing field
is provided to service the needs of the inhabitants of
Bourne's Village and the Flat Rock area?
Mr. SPEAKER: The same hon. member. His
Query re the construction of a road at Campion Castle.
Mr. CRAIG: Mr. Speaker, to enquire of the appro-
Will the Minister have a road constructed at Cam-
pion Castle, St. George so as to connect the two exist-
ing roads in the said district?
Mr. SPEAKER: The same hon. member. His
Query re! roads in the parish of St. George in need of
Mr. CRAIG: Mr. Speaker, to enquire of the appro-
Is the Minister aware that the roads of Drax Hall
and Parish Land in the parish of St. George are badly
in need of repairs?
Will the Minister have the said roads repaired as
soon as possible?
Mr. SPEAKER: The same hon. member. His
query re electricity in St. George.
Mr. CRAIG: Mr. Speaker, to enquire of the appro-
Is the Minister aware that there is no electric
service in Drax Hall nor in Parish Land in the parish
of St. George?
Will the Minister use his good offices to see that
electricity is installed in the said districts as soon as
Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. junior member for St.
John. His Query re fishermen.
Mr. YEARWOOD: Mr. Speaker, toenquire of the
Is the Minister aware of the hardship experienced
by fishermen from time to time in the sale of their
catches of fish?
Will the Minister see to it that the storage space
for fish is increased at the Barbados Marketing Cor-
poration so that fishermen may receive a guaranteed
price for their catches?
In the alternative, will the Minister considerthe
removal of the Item "Fresh Fish" from the Scheduled
Price Control Order?
BILL READ A FIRST TIME
Hon. C. E. TALMA: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move
that a Bill to amend the Solicitors Act, 1896, be now
read a first time.
Hon. G.G. FERGUSSON: I beg to second that.
The question was put and resolved in the affirmative with-
Mr. SPEAKER: It is now Question Time and I am
advised that the Reply to Parliamentary Question No.
148, standing in the name of the Hon. and Learned
member for St. Thomas has been laid.
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, the ques-
tion reads as follows:
1. Is there a shortage of staff at the Govern-
ment Information Office?
2. Will the Minister state why the normal
practice of revealing information on Government ac -
tivities and plans through the medium of the Govern-
ment Information Office has recently been broken in
that Press Conferences have been conducted by Min-
isters at the Headquarters of the Democratic Labour
3. Is the Minister aware that no invitations
were issued for these Press Conferences to the "Bea-
con" and the "Truth" Newspapers?
4. Will the Minister agree that the moneys be -
ing spent to carry out the activities and plans of the
Government are the taxpayers' moneys, and not the
funds of the Democratic Labour Party?
5. Will the Minister make representation to
the Cabinet that the Government Information Office is
fully capable of publicising Government activities and
the Ministers' first duty is to Government, and not
Party organs of information?
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Speaker, the Reply is as
"1. Yes, sir.
2. The normal practice of revealing informa-
tion on Government activities and plans through the
medium of the Government Information Office still
3. The issuing of invitations to Party Press
Conferences is not the concern of the Minister.
4. Does not arise.
5. The Minister does not consider any such
representations either in order or necessary."
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Will the Minister inform
us how the question of his agreement that moneys be-
ing spent to carry out the activities and plans of the
Government are the taxpayers' money and not the funds
of the Democratic Labour Party' does not arise? How
is it possible to say it does not arise? The Minister
does not seem inclined to rise. Is it true or is it not
true that the Government's plans are carried out with
the taxpayers' moneys? What kind of ignorant answer
Hon, J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Speaker, my reluctance
iwas not a refusal to answer. I just did not follow the
drift of the hon. member's argument. Do Iunderstand
him to be saying that the answer to (4) as given here
did not logically connect with the answer to (3) or with
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, Question
(4) reads; "Will the Minister agree that the moneys
being spent to carry out the activities and plans of the
Government are the taxpayers' moneys, andnot the
funds of the Democratic Labour Party?" Howcan any
Minister answer that that does not arise?
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Speaker, Question (3)
which was answered being "Is the Minister aware that
no invitations were issued for these Press Con-
ferences to the "Beacon" and the "Truth" news-
papers, I take it that Question (4) logically arises from
Question (3), not only numerically but in point of
logic. The answer to Question (3) beingthat "the issu-
ing of invitations to Party Press Conferences is not
the concern of the Minister", it is considered that the
answer to Question (4) logically hangs on the answer to
Question (3). This would not arise because the Min-
ister is not himself concerned with the issuingof in-
vitations to party Press Conferences. That is how I
took it; I do not know if the hon. member sees it
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, I know this
is not the Minister's answer, and I hope he will take
the same steps with whatever ignorant Civil Servants
drew these answers.
Mr. SPEAKER: Is this a supplementary Question
on the way?
Mr, J. M. G. M. ADAMS: It is a point of explana-
Mr. SPEAKER: I am afraid ......
Mr, J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Ithinkthe Minister ap-
preciates what I am saying. It is not his answer; so the
fact that it does not make sense we should not casti-
gate this Minister for. There is another Minister re-
sponsible, and1 there are other ignorant people
responsible for it.
Mr. SPEAKER: I am afraid this is more like a
Mr, J. M. G. M. ADAMS: I am sorry, sir.
Mr. SPEAKER: I share the hon. member's regret
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: And lam sure all hon.
members will share the regret that so foolish an
answer should have been allowed to disfigure the
papers of this House.
Mr. Speaker, as a supplementary, are any steps
being taken to remedy the shortage of staff?
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Yes, I can answer .that
affirmatively. The proposals from the Ministry are
now with the Chief Establishment Officer for an in-
crease in the staff and for general amplification of
duties. These proposals will shortly be made known,
and I think that within three months' time this
situation will be remedied.
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, is it con-
templated that the increases at the operating level, so
to speak, will be Established increases or non-Es-
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: I cannot answer this with any
certainty, but I should think that mostofthem will be
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, can the
Minister say if there is any truth in the statement that
has been made that the Organising Secretary of the
Democratic Labour Party and/or Mr. Tony
Vanterpool has already been offered positions in an
expanded Information Service?
lion. J. C. TUDOR: I have not heard that state-
ment, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. J.M.G.M.ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, the Question
was answered generally. This is the fifth part of it.
Will the Minister agree that the Minister's first duty
is to Government and not Party organs of informa-
tion? Does he agree that Minister's first duty on
Government activities is not to Party organs of in-
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Speaker, I couldanswer
this by giving an opinion, but this is surely not a
question which will come within a Minister's official
competence. This could only be a matter of opinion;
it cannot arise out of a Minister's duty, because he
must know what his duties are. If you want a personal
opinion, Iwould say; "Yes, one's prior duty is to Gov-
ernment because one serves the Government."
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Since one's first duty is
to Government's organs of information, in the opinion
of the Leader of the House, what can the Minister say
about the fact that a number of Government projects,
such as prospective legislation, have been first made
known via the medium of these Press Conferences and
not via either introduction in this House, or an official
release from the Government's organs of informa-
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Speaker, Ithinkthe hon.
member will find in most, if not all, cases that prior
intimation of Government's programme and policy Is
given in its Manifesto, and Manifestos are usually pro-
duced when Parliament is not meeting, or when there
is not a Parliament.
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Mr. Speaker, will the
Minister say when the Government has ever published
a Manifesto, or what Government? The question may
be rhetoric, but the Minister is always confusinghim-
self. Will the Minister consider it appropriate that,
for example, a proposal to bring women into the jury
system of Barbados should first be made known out
in Roebuck Street when various organs of the Press
were not present? Is this not discrimination against
the genuine Press? (Asides)
Mr. SPEAKER: The questions are beingaddress-
ed to the Hon. Leader of the House and to no other
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: I do not agree with him.
Mr. SPEAKER: I understand that no other replies
have been laid, and this completes Questions for to-
day. It is not yet 3.15 p.m., but we may proceed to
Private Members' Business. The first Order of the
Day stands in the name of the hon. senior member for
Bridgetown. When this matter was last discussed in
this Chamber on the 5th December of last year, the
hon. senior member for St. Andrew was speaking. If
there is no other hon. member desiring to contribute
to this debate, the hon. senior member for Bridge-
town may now exercise his right of final reply.
PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS
THE WEST INDIES HOSPITAL FUND LIMITED
Mr. MOTTLEY: In God's good time it had to
come, Sir. Some people thought Iwouldnever have an
opportunity of replying. The first thing to which I
would like to draw hon. members' attention is the fact
that this Bill to repeal the West Indies Hospital Fund
Limited Act does not prevent, if the Bill is read care-
fully, the Government from collecting any funds due
and owing to the Government. I want that made clear.
This Bill will not prevent, if repealed, the Government
from collecting any funds due and owing to the Govern-
Mr. Speaker, I will have to do something today
that I am not in the habit of doing and I never like do -
ing. I have heard and read quite a number of speeches
on this Bill. I never like to reply to anything a mem-
ber has said in his absence, but I am going to crave
your permission in fact, it is not craving per-
mission, Sir; it is my right. I was not in here when
some hon. members spoke on this Bill. I note that
some members spoke while I was here and confined
their remarks to the Bill without going into persona-
lities, and I shall do that myself while making my re-
marks on the Bill.
I also notice that and anything I have in my
hand I am prepared to put it in as a document of the
House. I say that before any member catches himself
and thinks that he can knock me off the ball, The
Advocate of Saturday, November 18, in very bold head-
lines, in referring to the Prime Minister's speech in
dealing with the Hospital Bill, strayed and was allowed
to stray, Mr. Speaker, into a lot of things. I look
around and notice that those who were responsible for
the headlines are out of the House now,
Sir, there is a lot of room for a school for re-
porters, at least, to teach them journalistic integrity
in dealing with factual reports in this House instead
of taking sides. I suppose, Sir, having given notice
of this Bill for such a long time, and the course it
has taken, will prevent us in the Opposition and those
possibly of the Government backbenchers, who may
feel as we feel, from expressing their views because
of Party loyalty here in this House.
The Advocate of November 18 said:
"$225,000 BENEFIT TO NATION. PRIME MIN-
ISTER DEFENDS THE WEST INDIES HOSPITAL
Instead of dealing with the Hospital Sweep, the Prime
Minister took the opportunity, when I was out of the
House, to deal with me. This is what the newspaper
said, and I have not heard neither have I seen -
it corrected nor denied; therefore, it is my right to
draw it to the attention of the House. If the newspapers
choose to publish it, they can. If they do not, it is a
matter entirely for them. I am still not looking for a
job, and I have never been looking for one. The Ad-
"Mr. Barrow, who was speaking on the motion for
the second reading of the Bill to repeal the Hos-
pital Sweep, a motion tabled by E. D. Mottley,
senior member for Bridgetown, unleased a scath -
ing attack on members of the Opposition in
general and members of the former Bridgetown
City Council in particular."
This, of course, was done in my absence. When you
are ready to call for this as a document of the House,
Mr. Speaker, you can call for it.
Mr. SPEAKER: May I remind the hon. member of
Standing Order 26 (1):
"A Member shallnot readhis speech, buthe may
read extracts from books or papers other than news -
papers in support of his argument, and may refresh
his memory by reference to notes."
Mr. MOTTLEY: Mr. Speaker, youhave known
me in here for overtwentyyears. Have you even seen
me reading a speech when you were Leader of the
Mr. SPEAKER: I am not dealingwith that part of
Standing Order 26 (1) which says that a member shall
not read his speech; I am drawing to the attention of
the hon. member in fact, I am reminding him of that
part which says that he may read from books or pa-
pers other than newspapers.
Mr. MOTTLEY: I know that you are aware of the
Standing Order, but I know that hon. members will
suddenly get up and say: "Make this a document of
the House," and I am drawing to their attention that I
will make it a document of the House.
Mr. SPEAKER: That does not arise. A member
may read extracts from books or papers other than
newspapers in support of his argument.
Mr. MOTTLEY: These are in support of myar-
gument. Are you saying, after you sat in the Chair
and allowed the Prime Minister to make this type of
speech in here, that I am not entitled to defend my-
self on it? This is referring to me.
Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. member, I take it, is
assuming that this is an accurate report of what was
Mr. MOTTLEY: In the absence of a denial since
it was published on November 18th, 1967.
Mr. SPEAKER: I do not know if the hon. member
has consulted Hansard.
Mr. MOTTLEY: I have consulted Hansard, Sir.
Mr. SPEAKER: I understand that the Hansard in
respect of that meeting has actually been printed. The
hon. member will be surprised to hear that; so am I.
Mr. MOTTLEY: We will all be surprised, but I
was not really surprised when I saw it. Anyhow, Sir,
it says: "Especially the former Bridgetown City
Council, particularly the latter, for saddling the tax-
payers with $80,000 interest on loans made by the
City Council from Commercial Banks."
On this point, I want to say that this was a man
who could get the facts and who wouldbe in a position
to get the facts. He made this statement and it went
on further to say: "Mr. Barrow, admitted that when
the Bill had been passed in the House, there were
reservations by Mr. Mottley and Mr. Lloyd Smith,
the senior member for St. Joseph," but he said that
the Bill had been passed unanimously. This is true.
We did have reservations and we actually went to a
Committee; but, as my colleague, the hon. junior
member for the City will tell you, when we were in-
formed of the money which it would be bringing into
Barbados, we thought that we would throw our lot in
because it was a question of bringinghalf a million
dollars a year into Barbados. Now, Sir, I quote from
the third column where Mr. Barrow recalled the con-
ditions under which the Sweep had been permitted to
operate, among them a tax at the rate of 20% cal-
culated on the sales of tickets and a 25% tax on prize
winnings, as well as a licence fee of $500,000. All that
is correct; this part, at least is correct. My argument
is that it has not been received. I will soon be finished
with this part and I will get on to the most relative
part as to the repeal of the Act. Mr. Barrow said,
that there had been crocodile tears shed with the abo-
lition of the Local Government. In his absence I want
to say this. If he does not know this, I will tell him
that to abolish Local Government, as far as Bridge-
town is concerned, he did me a favour. When I go to
do anything, I put my whole heart and soul into it, and
possibly it will save my life a little longer. I had no
crocodile tears to shed at all; so if he thinks that I
had shed any crocodile tears, he is wrong, because
if there is one person who got down and prayed that
night and said that she was happy about it, that was
my wife who thought that I was never given a chance,
since day after day from o'clock inthe morning un-
til midnight, people wanted me to do all sorts of.
Mr. Speaker, I go on to this part: "What has not
been said was that the City Council was not only $2
million in debt, but was in debt to Commercial Banks
by over $1.2 million because of the rate of interest
possibly between $80,000 and $90,000." "It went
further", said Mr. Barrow, "while the Government"
and this was allowed in the House in dealing with the
repeal of the West Indies Hospital Act; this would not
have been allowed to one single member over here.
"It went further," said Mr. Barrow; "while the
Government had proposals for collecting $52 million a
year, the Bridgetown City Council had arrears in the
payment of taxes of $2 million for the past fifteen
years and the total arrears for the three years was
about $3 million." I challenge the Prime Minister of
this country to give him this seat which I have in here;
and I want to say this this is all I have to say on this
Mr. SPEAKER: I just want to tell the hon. mem-
ber this; I was quite satisfied that my understanding
of Standing Order 26(1) was correct. I have had cer-
tain research done by both Clerks at the Table, and I
am entirely fortified in my view of the meaning and
interpretation of that Clause which says that a mem-
ber may read extracts from books or papers other
than newspapers in support of his argument. A mem-
ber cannot read extracts from newspapers. The usual
practice is for an hon. member to have something
which appears in a newspaper copied and he refers to
that as part of his notes. That is the procedure which
I certainly followed when I was around the Table.
Mr. MOTTLEY: Mr. Speaker, I am fully ac-
quainted with that, Sir, but it has been reported and
what I want to say is this, that such references to the
Bridgetown City Council with its indebtedness and the
$80,000 a year and the $2 million and the three mil-
lion, when you think of any man who is in the position
of the Prime Minister, whose respect for the un-
varnished truth makes him respected in dealing with
this matter, you would consider him as one who is
quite easily to be believed. I think that I am mild in
putting it in that way. Mind you, he is in position to
get all the facts and instead of getting up and trying
to draw a red herring across the line about the Hos-
pital Sweep and making these stupid statements, he
should have dealt with the Hospital Sweep. What he
said about Mr. Smith and Mr. Mottley reserving the
right is absolutely correct, but he failed to say that
when we went into Select Committee, I questioned the
Solicitors: and when the Prime Minister saidthat the
operators of this Scheme owned $72 million, I made
it quite clear then that it did not matter to us if they
owned $172 million; what we wanted to knowwas what
this Company was capitalised at, and I got the So-
licitors for the Company in here and they could not
tell me. They said that the Bank of Nova Scotia were
the bankers and they could not tell me, and then we
were persuaded that in view of the fact that $500,000
would be brought in annually, we did vote for it. But
the Prime Minister was right; we voted for it with
As far as that is concerned, I just want to clear
the air. No crocodile tears with me at all; there is
absolutely no truth in what he said. I challenge him;
I will give this seat up to him challenging him as to
the veracity of the statement that he made here. He
could have got the correct statement if he wanted it.
Anyhow, let us forget that, Mr. Speaker.
The Bill which is before us, Mr. Speaker, is
one which I believe every decent-minded Barbadian
would like to see repealed and for this reason: this
Bill was brought in for the purpose of providing
$500,000 a year. I am not goingto be personal, but as
far as the statement which the hon. senior member for
St. Michael made in here is concerned, all that I would
say is that ifyouare goingto get a silk purse, you can
only cut it out of silk cloth. That is as far as he is
concerned. I have nothing more to say about that, but
in making a job for somebody, Iam not doing it at the
expense of the good name of Barbados for over three
This Company has been fortunate. We heard a lot
in here about how many people it employed and what
they are doing. When I was Mayor of the City of
Bridgetown, I received several letters fromabroad.
Several lawyers in this country also received several
letters, and nearly every newspaper editor in this
country received letters from abroad about this Com-
pany. I "caught fire" on this matter and I tried to find
out something more about it, but I came to the con-
clusion at that time that I would give the people con-
cerning this Company a chance to see what would
Well now, Sir, since that has happened, what have
we found? I would like the newspapers topublish this
since they can publish what the Prime Minister has
said. I categorically say what he said was absolutely
untrue about this Company. I also say this further.
The statement made in here about money being paid
in as income tax is absolutely untrue. These are fig-
ures which cannot be cookedup, but what do you find?
The senior member for St. Michael who is Secretary
or Manager or Governing Director or whatever it is
to this Company said we should give the Company a
chance, and if you gave it a chance it would be able to
pay off its indebtedness.
This is what I am worried about, Sir. I hold here
in my hands a document which I am prepared to sur-
render to you. I am not reading any newspaper. It is
"West Indies Hospital Sweepstake Draw List", date
of draw, December 12, 1966, and at the bottom as
you know, Sir, it is marked: "printedatthe Advocate
Commercial Printery". Under the law, you must say
who printed it. This is the first thing which I would
deal with. It reads: "Date of Draw, December 12, 1966
and tickets sold on Golden Gate Handicap. Drawn and
substituted Bright Memorial in connection with the
Fifth Sweepstake held in aid of the Queen Elizabeth
Hospital in Bridgetown, Barbados."
Mr. Speaker, I would like hon. members to listen
to this: it is within your knowledge that I challenged
the Leader of the House another hon. members over
there. The document goes on to say that 20 per cent
Barbados Government tax will be deducted by the
Company before prizes are paid. All prizes based
on $1,000,000 sales unit, and if the unit is less, then
the amount of prizes will be reduced proportionately.
Prizes will be paid in the currency of the country
where the prize winner resides.
I am quite willing, Sir, to put this in as a docu-
ment of the House: that is, if the Ministers would like
to see it. They may not have seen it. They may think
that I am attempting to repeal the West Indies Hos-
pital Fund Bill because Ihave something against some
person. I have reached an age; Ihave lived in Barba-
dos. I was born in Barbados and all I have is in Bar-
bados. I know what it is to come from a country with
a good name. You say that you are running a sweeps -
take for the Queen Elizabeth Hospital. This is No. 1.
If you go to Seawell Airport and the Harbour, you will
see these tickets sold to people. Actually, Mr. Speaker,
I am reading from a Toronto leading newspaper. It
"Tickets pay $175,000 (U.S.) money." That is
O.K. So says Mr. M. P. Toronto. "They may be sold
in Barbados; but if you sell any of these tickets here,
you may earn a special prize trip to the eastern coun-
try of the Morality Bureau. No sweepstake is legal in
That you can see for yourself, Mr. Speaker. I am
not worried about that. They can put what they like
there. I come to the point which is of much importance
to us. This is a book of the Sweepstake which was sent
to me. Listen to this very carefully. "P.O. Box 1287".
Mr. Speaker, it is significant that nobody can find P.O.
Box 1287 and I am going to give you numbers of other
P. O. Boxes too. This reads: "Dear friend- several
purchasers of our tickets for previous draws have
written us asking for tickets, as the persons from
whom they bought tickets originally had not offered
them any more for various reasons. We believe you
will still be interested in helping our cause but may
not have had the opportunity of purchasingour tickets
since the Winter Stakes in August 1966 of the Golden
Gate Handicap of December, 1966. We are therefore
sending you two books of tickets for the seventh race
of the Winter Stakes which will be run at Saratogo
Springs, New York, in August. We have no intention of
cutting across the seller, but this gives you an oppor-
tunity of taking part in the draw."
Now as regards the seller's instructions, it gives
all the seller's instructions and those are sent out by
the Barbados Sweepstake itself. This book of tickets
got back to me in Barbados. But look, Mr. Speaker, at
the one most important thing! Ihave inmy hand a let-
ter stating "P. O. Box1287" andthere is no P. O. Box
1287. This is a serious matter, one which the Police
should go into. In actual fact, there is no such P.O.
Box if you go there. Who, therefore, Mr. Speaker, is
drawing this money?
It states: "You have been recommended dear
friend, by a mutual friend, as a trustworthy person to
help our worthy cause to sell the enclosed tickets for
the Fifth Sweepstake, the Golden Gate Handicap. Now
the West Indies Hospital Sweepstake carried the lar-
gest first prize of $175,000 (U.S.) plus several other
big cash prizes.
I want hon. members to really listen to this be-
cause this is what annoyed me,andlam rather sorry
that the Hon. Prime Minister and the hon. senior
member for St. Michael are not here. "The principal
benefactor of the Sweepstake is the new $8 million
Queen Elizabeth Hospital dedicated by Prince Phillip
of England." I would like the Marshal to pass this a-
round. Could you honestly sit down there, after you
took the hard-earned money of the taxpayers of this
country and built our Hospital, and allow somebody
selling a Sweepstake to send out that it is operated for
the benefit and welfare needs of the CaribbeanIslands,
and that the principal benefactor is the new $8 million
Queen Elizabeth Hospital dedicated by Prince Philip
of England? My God have mercy! Could anything be
worse than that? You are using Prince Philip's name
and the name of the Hospital in this matter. I voted for
this Sweepstake because I would have supported any-
thing that brings money into Barbados, but not this
racket. This is a nasty, worthless, depraved racket.
"The principal benefactor is the $8 million Queen
Elizabeth Hospital dedicated by Prince Philip." Who
is Prince Philip? The Queen's husband. And you are
sending this out to England.
Let me tell you something, Mr. Speaker. I went
to the Post Office to locate these post boxes and there
are no such boxes, but one persongoes down from the
Hospital Sweepstake and collects the letters. I have
here a letter from a sister and a friend of a school
teacher and an auditor in Barbados. These people
merely go to the Tourist Board or to Pan American
or Trans Canada Airways and get people's names as
soon as they arrive here and send them these letters.
Do you think this is fair? They use a false name like
Rudy Simpson; so the obvious thing is for somebody
to say he does not knowanythingabout it. If you think
I am reading something that is not here, I would like
the Marshal to pass this around and let members of the
Government see it. You do not have to believe me. I
cannot support a thing like this. Carry this around to
Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. member may address
the Chair only.
Mr. MOTTLEY: Who else do you think lam ad-
Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. member is not address -
ing the Chair if he asks somebody to carry something
around. The Chair will carry nothing around to the
Mr. MOTTLEY: I thought the Chair would allow
that to happen.
Mr. SPEAKER: That is an entirely different thing.
Mr. MOTTLEY: I did not think you would come,
down to carry it around. I know you are very courte-
ous in matters of this sort.
I have here another one with the name "Ivy Reid"
The Sweepstake is using these names and the P.O.
Box is 1027. Go to the Postmaster and find out what
is happening. I have come here armed with the facts.
This says: "The new West Indian Hospital Sweep car-
ries the world's largest first prize $175,000 plus
several other prices" and soon; "The West Indian
Hospital Sweep through special legislation is au-
thorised and supervised by the Government of Bar-
bados". Is this true or is it not true? Can you let a
thing like this go out of Barbados? The Government of
Barbados does not supervise any sweepstake. I have
more to give you which will shock you. Who is the
Minister supervising the Hospital Sweep? The
"Advocate can publish all the bloody headlines they
want; they cannot disregard that this is dishonesty.
They can put headlines in the paper drawing a red
herring across the line talking about the City Council;
but they cannot say that I carried away the money.
"Supervised by the Government of Barbados and is
operated for the benefit and welfare needs in the
Caribbean Islands. The principal benefactor of the
sweepstake is the new $8 million Queen Elizabeth
Hospital dedicated by Prince Philip of England." Do
you think this is a good thing for Barbados? The re-
cipient of these letters were to send up $35, but I
advised them not to send it because it is not for the
Barbados Queen Elizabeth Hospital, because it is not
run by the Barbados Government.
Mr. Speaker, I am as loyal a Barbadian as any
person you have ever found and more loyal than
possibly half the members on the Government side,
but I have reached the age now where I do not want
to go anywhere. When you get a thing like this going
out of Barbados telling people that this is being run
for the Queen Elizabeth Hospital which was dedicated
by Prince Philip, argue as you like: this is a sur-
reptitious means of using somebody's name. They
have not got enough post boxes; so they hold the let-
ters and one messenger from the Hospital Sweep-
stake goes and collects the letters when this money
is returned. I have friends in Barbados and people
write me these things. I had a friend who was work-
ing on a train between Saskatchewan and Montreal,
I believe, and he told me he was so ashamed because
he had sold so many tickets only to find that he could
hear nothing. This man was from Speightstown. He
wrote me several times; he wrote the "Advocate";
and he wrote the Hospital Sweepstake, but to no avail.
Could any honest-minded man and member of the
House say that this is the correct thing to do to get
money out of people, by telling them this is for the
Queen Elizabeth Hospital? The envelopes are sent
up typed "Return to Ruby Simpson, P.O. Box 1272
Bridgetown, Barbados W.I."
Now I am going to tell you this: Marcus Garvey
got locked up for less than this. This adverting to the
mail and doing this is a serious thing. Getting money
from people in this way is doing Barbados no good.
I thought we could have got the $500,000 and I voted
for this then, and I would vote again if I thought we
could collect the money, but when I know for a fact
that the few dollars paid into the Court and the money
paid over...... Mr. Marshal......
Mr. SPEAKER: Would the hon. member like me
to request the Marshal to await him?
Mr. MOTTLEY: Yes, if you want to do it this way.
Mr. SPEAKER: That is the only decentway to do
Mr. MOTTLEY: It might be the only decent way,
but there is another way then.
Mr. SPEAKER: I understand that the hon. mem-
ber would like the Marshal to wait upon him.
Mr. MOTTLEY: Take that around to the Govern-
Even in the Estimates you put in nothing last
year, but you expect $25,000 this year. If you can get
$500,000 a year here to relieve housing conditions,
the feeding of school children and so on, I will vote
for it again; but I cannot vote for something just to
keep somebody in a job. This is corrupt business.
Any Government that would prostitute themselves in
such a manner as to support something of this sort
when they know they would not get anythingfrom any
Hospital sweep I say this is corruption of the high-
est calibre. How does this read in England? You are
prostituting this in the name of Prince Philip, the
Queen's husband. You come in here and talk a lot of
nonsense, and throw a red herring across the trail
by saying that the City Council owes this money to
people and that sort of thing.
There is another one, Sir, from Fred Spencer.
It says the same thing. Most people will gamble in
order to help a Hospital. If this Sweepstake was run
on a proper footing as a matter of fact, if the Gov-
ernment want to run a sweepstake, I would be the first
to support it. To gamble is human nature. I would
support it tomorrow, if we were going to get money
for all the various things we have to do in Barbados.
Do not tell me, just forthe sake of getting something,
Mr. Speaker, for a person, that we are going to do
this. I hope that the Government will crave the right,
and I am sure you will grant it, to say it is not true
that the West Indies Hospital Sweepstake is super-
vised and run by the Government. I did not print these
documents. It is one of the fellow-traveller's tricks
to say he has printed them himself. You will try the
Post Office first; try the Police Department; try the
Commissioner of Police, and find out how many they
This one, here, deals with the price-selling of the
sweepstakes and tells you how much you will get. I can
go on ad infinitum on a matter of this sort because I
have the data which I can use, but I only want to bring
the Government to their senses. I know that the Leader
of the House made a half-hearted speech. Itwas part
of his duty tomake a speech, if somebody was in-
troducing something to repeal a Bill.
Mr. Speaker, they were unable to get youto rule
that it was out of order, because somebody was trying
to take money out of the Treasury, and then the next
thing would be for Government to try and bring their
Party together and vote against it. I have listened
carefully to the half-hearted speech of the Leader of
the House. Unfortunately, I was not in here all of the
time. Let us look at another document, Sir. This is
Mr. Fergusson not the member of this House. It
"October 18, 1965. First Prize Winner -$175,000
American money. Ticket J 21497.
Dear Mr. Fergusson,
I am in receipt of your letter dated Sep-
tember 27 to Mr. G. G. Strawbecker, senior Vice Pre-
sident of the Bank of Virginia.
In your letter you stated that your company is
presently being re-financed and funds have been de-
posited and only waiting settlement also. You believe
it would occur in about a week." Are you listening to
this? I do not know by whom this company was being
re-financed. All the time they are talking about the
Barbados Government. I will continue;
"As of today I have not received the said funds,
which is more than three weeks from the date of your
I am sorry the manager of the company is not here to
dispute these things. The letter also stated:
"I trust that first prize payment is on the way, or
will be on its way within the next few days. If payment
is not received within 10 days from the date of this
letter, I will be forced to seek other measures to ob-
tain the said funds.
J. W. Thompson, P. O. Box 368, Virginia,"
Do you believe I wrote this? I have not written these,
The Company is being re-financed, andyet I am
told in here that all the money has been paid in. This
is not fair to the good name of Barbados. When will
the Company be re-financed? I did not go to Expo, but
my friends at Expo told me that all you could hear at
Expo was:"Mount Gay; tell me something about the
West Indies Hospital Sweep." The people wanted to
know how we were getting along with the funds for
building the Hospital. That is all you can hear there.
Now a copy of this letter was sent to the Mayor of
Bridgetown; the hon. Winter Crawford, and the British
Embassy, for your information, Sir. Mottley, Craw-
ford, and the British High Commissioner's Office; so
you can see how far this is going. These people are
sending out letters and using the Queen's husband's
name with a Hospital or with a Company which is
nothing but a fraud.
Now, therefore, having given you some of the
f.cts, would not I have a right Fergie, do not tear
up that; bring it back.
Mr. SPEAKER: I heard a strange name men-
Mr. MOTTLEY: This is a man who is supposed
to have won the $175,000, and not a member of this
House. I would like to know, Mr. Speaker, if, on the
face of these documents and the facts I have pro-
duced to you, any hon. member including the Minister
of Communications and Works you should not write
when I am speaking would say that any hon. mem-
ber who got hold of the facts would be right in going
about saying this is a worthless Government, and they
are doing it in truth. Can I write back and tell them
that the Government backs this Hospital Sweep, and
that the benefits will go to the Queen I Elizabeth Hos-
pital? No. I am doing an, honourable and an honest
thing; I come into this House and draw things to the
attention of the Ministers. If they want to be dishonest
let them vote against a repeal of the Act.
Let them vote against it. It is a matter entirely
for them. If they know that the Sweepstake is being
run by the Government, if they know that it is financ-
ing the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, that it was dedi-
cated by Prince Philip, if they know thatthat is true
then let them vote against the repeal of the Act; but
if you know that it is not true, then I would like to
know what side will you take. Mr. Speaker, even the
most ardent supporters of the Democratic Labour
Party, the strongest supporters, even those suppor-
ters who are blind and slavish to patriotism, will
acknowledge that if these facts have been so clearly
put and they have been bolstered up by documentary
evidence, it would be impossible for any member of
the Government Party with a clear conscience to vote
against the repeal of this Act. I say that I voted for it
nobody can throw this at me -I voted for it because
of what I felt was represented to me at the time; but a
man is very small when he is led up the path by some -
one else and he realises that a mistake has been made,
and he cannot say: "Ihave made a mistake." I believe
that the Prime Minister, in good faith, brought in this
Bill and we all supported it in good faith. The hon.
senior member for St. Joseph and Iwere responsible
for sending it to a Select Committee. We all supported
it; but if you find that this is going wrong, you cannot
keep a man in a job as I said before, I do not con-
sider the hon. senior member for St. Michael I will
not say anything disparaging about him. I said what I
said and that is enough as far as I am concerned. He
Is young, he is running it and he thinks that that is the
best way to run it. I could say a lot of things, but I am
sticking purely to documentary evidence and purely
on the facts as they are. You have not collected even
one-third of the money which you anticipated you
would collect. If I am wrong, surely the Hon. Leader
of the House will correct me, and this is from 1965,
1966, 1967 and now 1968. This means that you would
have collected $2 million, but have you c collected it?
No. As to the argument used about finding work for
people, you can find work for people by hanging peo-
ple. That is work too. Have you collected $2 million?
Have you collected this percentage.-I know when the
$22,000 was paid into Court, I know when they were
sued. When I made the first noise in here, they went
and paid in this money. They have been trying to pay.
The argument used by the hon. senior member for
St. Michael is: "Give them a chance and they will be
able to pay off their indebtedness." You will be able
to pay off your indebtedness by telling people that the
Government of Barbados is running the Sweepstake,
by telling the people that after the Hospital was built
with the hard-earned money of the taxpayers of Bar-
bados, you are running the Sweepstake and the chief
beneficiary of this Sweepstake is the Queen Elizabeth
Hospital? Are you really going to sit down on a mat-
ter like this? Are you really going to sit down and
allow Her Majesty's Post Office are you going to
allow the Government of Barbados to use the Post
Office as a place for blackmailing people? Are you
going to allow a Sweepstake Company to use fictitious
names and then use somebody to go to the Post Office
and collect the letters and whatever money you get
and then the people do not hear anything at all about
it? How do you expect I got in possession of these
facts? Are you going to allow the Postmaster General
to tremble in trepidation and fear that somebody will
report him or something like that? Are you going to
allow this thing to go on? Because the Police feel that
the Government is running this thing, are you going to
let this thing go on? After all, they will talk.
When the Head of the Police Force or other per-
sons high in the Police Department receive mailed
communication in this matter, what can you do? They
know as a fact that it is nothing to do with the Queen
Elizabeth Hospital. Do you mean that you must just
write back and say that the Government is not running
any such thing? I suppose you thought that I was com-
ing in here to vilify or abuse or say some ill things
about somebody. No, I have come inhere to deal with
facts. My facts are there, and when the Hansard is
written, it must go down in history that I have pre-
sented these facts. Whether you like it or not, these
are facts and facts are very stubborn. You can hardly
remove them. (A PAUSE)
Mr. SPEAKER: I am afraid that I cannot hear
the hon. member now.
Mr. MOTTLEY: All right, Sir, you will hear me
in due course, in good time. I have presented the
facts; the facts are straightforward and stubborn and
they can hardly be got around. Whatever a Govern-
ment in power likes to do, they can do because they
have the majority vote; but, in the circumstances, I
counsel hon. members that you cannot go on exposing
the Barbados Post Office which, I am told, from a
legal point of view (ASIDES). As I said, Sir, if we were
running a Sweepstake in support of a new hospital or
of any hospital or a fund which the Government would
direct, none of us could have any grouse about it; but
having seen for yourself what the position is, are you
going to sit here today and vote against this Bill? I
wonder, Mr. Speaker, if they could sit here and vote
against this, what would happen with anybody who was
charged with murder and they saw that a case was not
made out against him, that he was not even near
there, what would they do? This is shameless. This
argument about employing people and about bringing
down machinery and employing people and how much
the "Advocate" made out of it and the like, all of that
is beside the point.
Everybody knows, Sir, that this Company actually
used the picture of nurses in uniform to send it abroad
to make believe that it had something to do with the
Queen Elizabeth Hospital. Nurses were used in the
draw as well as policemen who were asked to stand
by. All this was done because it was published in the
U.S.A. and Canada, and even in England to make be-
lieve that the chief beneficiary was the Hospital. I
wonder if the hon. member can tell me if the Hospital
has got any money out of this Company yet. I cate-
gorically deny the statement which the hon. member
made that money was paid in.
It is true that you cannot get information from
the Income Tax Commissioner. It is secret. Whether
the Government can get it, I do not know, but you
cannot get information from the Income Tax Com-
missioner. However, you cannot stop me from getting
information from the Courts.
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: On a point of order, Mr.
Chairman. The only time in which I would interrupt
the hon. member is the time which arose out of what
the hon. member has just said. He said: "Maybe the
Government can get information." Those are the exact
words. I hope the hon. member realises that this is
Mr. MOTTLEY: Well, if this is improper, Ihave
had the information from the Courts. It is impossible
for you to get information from the Income Tax Com-
missioner. How did you make those categorical
statements in here that this money was received? You
said that you received nothing last year. How then
have you made this statement about $220,000? When I
say "you", I do not mean the hon. member. You ad-
mit that Government members cannot get this infor-
mation. All of us can get it from the Courts. How have
you made this dogmatic statement that all of this
money was paid in? If this money is paid in, then
something is wrong with the Estimates. If the money
is paid in, it has to be shown in the Estimates. I think
the Hon. Leader of the House would agree to that.
Which Estimates can you find that in? You cannot find
it in either Estimates at all.
I do not know if the hon. member wants me to re-
fresh his memory about the figures. I can refresh his
memory. I would like the Hon. Leader of the House
to know that there were $225,000 to the benefit of the
Nation. If you can get that, we ought to have it. The
Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, Mr. Errol
Barrow, said that today. This was the 18th November,
1967. I am reading from my notes.
Mr. SPEAKER: I did have that impression, al-
though I realized that the hon. member would not
have done it; but it appeared to be a newspaper at
which he was looking.
Mr. MOTTLEY: I am- looking at a picture.
Mr. SPEAKER: I accept the assurance of any hoq.
Mr. MOTTLEY: Yes, Sir. It is all right, but the
Hon. Prime Minister goes on to say my note says -
$225,000. If the Prime Minister was misled, I do not
believe he misled us. I believe he conscientiously be-
lieved that he could have got it, and this sort of thing
is going on; do you think we should sit down here and
allow those things to go on? I certainly do not think so,
I feel, Mr. Speaker, this is a matter which hon.
members should take very seriously. What are we
getting from it? What are we gettingfrom it but a bad
name for Barbados?
(A VOICE: What about the tamarind barrels?)
I am not worried about the tamarind barrels. They
have to ship them out somehow. Everybody in the
country know that within six months after the Sweep-
stake started two of the big officials here were sent
to prison in Canada because it is illegal to sell the
tickets in Canada.
I am just reading something here on the tickets.
Now, Mr. Speaker, I am not making this statement
dogmatically because I am not a race fan; but I have
been told on good authority an authority which I ac-
cept in a matter of this sort, by a person who is very
strongly in favour of the present Government that
some of these races stopped running about five years
before. They do not run them at all now. Maybe, the
Minister of Agriculture would know something about
this, but I understand that such races are not run at
all now, and this caused suspicion immediately in the
State of New York as to the amount which they would
pay out as the first prize.
Even if hon. members feel that they should not
vote for the repeal of this Bill on the facts as have
been disclosed here, they should now attempt to set
their house in order. One of the facts is that the State
of New York is now running a legally organized
Sweepstake monthly. Mayor Rockefeller has agreed -
I think it was started by Mayor Lindsay to a legally
organised Sweepstake. How then are you going to push
the West Indies Hospital Sweepstake into New York
now? How are you going to push them across the
border? I really do not think quite honestly that you
have got a chance with the West Indies Hospital
How do you think you are going to push this in the
United States now, when just across the border there
was a legally organised Sweepstake in 1967! If for no
other reason, you have not got a chance. You were to
receive $500,000 which was nothing to do with the per-
centage which you would get from the tickets sold,
because there was a flat agreement of $500,000 a year.
I had this Bill before the House for a long time, I
have presented the facts, but the strength of the Party
and the organisation will make hon. members who
see, know and read these facts as I have presented
them, vote against their consciences and make them
do something that would send Barbados further and
I regret the Hon. Prime Minister was not in here
to take me up on what he said when he drew a red
herring across the line, and instead of dealing with
the facts of the Hospital Sweep dealt with the City
Council and how much taxes were not collected. If I
open my mouth on that, I would never want to be per-
sonal or anything of the sort. I came in here to deal
with the Hospital Sweepstake. If you look around
here, everybody has a job and you have to find some
job for the hon. senior member for St. Michael, but
you cannot keep him in a jobatthe expense of the in-
tegrity and honesty of Barbados. Iam not one of those
people who object to a Party finding job for its sup-
porters, because if you do not helpyour friends when
you are in power, you are not going to help them when
you are out of power. You do whatever you like, be-
cause whatever goes up comes down; but too far East
is West. You cannot keep a man in a job in a Company
which is sending things through the Post Office telling
people in matter that is printed by the "Advocate"
that this is principally for the Queen Elizabeth Hos-
pital. The Hon. Leader of the House can play with
words. What does "chief beneficiary" mean? Does
it mean you are going to give them a hospital bed?
How have they become the chief beneficiary? This
says: "Queen Elizabeth Hospital dedicated by Prince
Philip". They have used the Queen's husband's name
to make it known in Canada, in America and in Eng-
land that he dedicated the Queen Elizabeth Hospital,
and the Hospital is getting most of the money. This is
not fair. Through the Post Office you are sending out
and collecting money, and people are writing me such
letters as I have read. They have also sent a letter to
Mr. Crawford and to the British Embassy here; so the
newspapers can write whatever they like and be as
corrupt as they like in this matter. I say here and now
that I have a copy of a letter which says that the Bri-
tish Embassy in Bridgetown was sent a letter also.
Let them try and hide as much of this as they can.
This matter was on the front page when the Prime
Minister spoke and defended the Hospital Sweepstake.
Let them be corrupt and say that only the Prime Min-
ister can defend the people; let them say that the Op-
position has not made out a case here today; let them
report as they like.
Mr. Speaker, the mighty should not use their
might unfit, neither should they deem that theirpros-
perity will last forever. This is wrong, and I can see
from the hang of their faces that they know it is
wrong, but Party allegiance will prevent them from
voting for this. Anybody who decides that you can al-
low people to send a Sweepstake out of Barbados say-
ing that the Queen Elizabeth Hospital is the chief
beneficiary is not true to himself. Suppose they never
report that I read a letter written to me from Virginia,
U.S.A. and noting that Mr. Crawfordandthe Embassy
in Barbados also got a letter, it does not matter. This
is something bad.
I remember well enough when we were told that
the man behind this project had $72 million. From
my little experience I said it did not matter how many
millions he had; I wantedto knowhow much this com-
pany was capitalised at. Mr. Turney, the Solicitor,
was brought into the Lobby of the House and he could
not tell us anything. He told us that Nova Scotia was
the Bank. Nova Scotia could not tell us anything, but
we were persuaded that $500,000 a year would come
to Barbados, and any sane or reasonable man, knowing
that $500,000 a year was coming to Barbados, would
vote for it. Do you mean that now that the Prime Min-
ister and his Party have found out that this is wrong
and they have not collected the money, they are still
going to keep it?
When I said in passing that I thought they might
be able to get it, the Leader of the House objected and
I withdrew it. They said the nation benefited by
$225,000 from it. This started in 1965 and they were
to get $500,000 a year. Itwas gamble. We did not get
it the first year nor the second year. (Mr. CORBIN:
You don't always win in gambling!) You do not always
win in gambling, but if anybody puts loaded dice on
you or works a double card or a marked card on you,
you do not like that. This iswhat is beingworkedonus
today. We are not getting any of the money, and if the
Prime Minister has said that we have got $225,000,
that is the total for all the years of operation. Last
year you had nothing in the Estimates, and this year
you have included $25,000.
I have been told to give them a chance. For
how long do they want a chance? All a man has
to do is to break a couple of stores in Bridge-
town, and every time he breaks one he can ask
for a chance. Then we see: "Beneficiary Bar-
bados Hospital Sweep." How can you honestly
support a thing like this?
I have shown you the documents to read; I have
told you that the numbers do not even exist in the Post
Office; I have told you that people are going in there
and asking for letters coming to the Hospital Sweep;
I have told you that money has been sent in. From one
of these letters you will actually notice that money
was sent here to a friend of mine, and I was asked
what to do. I said: "Bring it to me and let me see it."
When I went into the matter, I realized that something
was wrong when I saw that they had an invitation to
sell sweepstakes or to buy sweepstakes.
Look at what they are doing! They go to the Im-
migration Department and get a list of the names and
addresses of people as soon as Trans-Canada lands
here. They get the name and address of every Cana-
dian who lands here, and as soon as he returns to
Canada he will receive a letter askinghimto support
the Sweepstake. It will be pointed out that it will be in
the interest of the Hospitals in the West Indies, but
that the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Barbados will be
the chief beneficiary. Mr. Speaker, I do not know
English too well, but I wonder whether the Leader of
the House will tell me who is the chief beneficiary.
That is a fraud of the greatest magnitude. You can use
it in whatever legal term you like. If the Government
vote for it today, then they are supporting this fraud;
they are acquiescing to this fraud; they are allowing
a fraud to be perpetrated in this manner.
Mr. Speaker, this is something which we all re-
gret. This is a bad case. You cannot get jobs for peo-
ple by doing this. But on the 18th November you can
publish and get glaring headlines: "THE PRIME
MINISTER DEFENDS THEM $225,000. MOTTLEY
LOOKS LIKE AN ASS. MOTTLEY IS DOING SOME-
THING THAT SHOULD NOT BE DONE."
Mr. SPEAKER: The time for Private Members'
Business has expired, and Government Business is
the instant Order of the Day. The first Item under
Government Business stands in the name of the Hon.
Leader of the House, and it is to move the House into
Committee of Supply to consider the grant of sums of
money for the service of the Island.
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Speaker, I beg to 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 with-
out division, and Mr. SPEAKER left the Chair and the House
went into Committee of Supply, Mr. YEARWOOD in the Chair.
SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATE 1967-68 No. 67
A Resolution for $2,100,000 was called.
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Chairman, this Resolu-
tion seeks to supplement Head 104 Education with
a new item, item 19, Caribbean Broadcasting Cor-
poration. The sum of two million one hundred thousand
dollars is being required to make an advance to this
Corporation to enable it to revise its financial struc-
ture. The amount is to be repaid in a 10-year period
by quarterly instalments, the details of which hon.
members, I believe, are familiar with, or at any rate
with the proposal. The general purpose, apart from
restructuring the finances of the Corporation, is to
enable the Corporation to liquidate its loans and to
make itself, other things being equal, a more viable
Mr. Chairman, by Resolution, I think, No. 77 of
1963, the House of Assembly guaranteed the borrow-
ing by the Governor in Executive Committee of a loan
not exceeding $300,000 for the setting up, for financ-
ing and establishing, of the Radio Station, This money
was used principally for the purchase of equipment.
By another Resolution in the following year I
do not quite recall the number now in 1964, the
House approved of a subsequent guarantee this time
for $510,000 for the purchase of a transmitter and
studio equipment for the establishment of the Tele-
I believe, again, by a subsequent Resolution there
was another guarantee of I think, $250,000. The posi-
tion, therefore, is that like some other Statutory Au-
thorities the Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation was
not established with equity capital. This, I believe,
can be justified and defended on the ground that if you
are going into a new venture, it is, perhaps, as well
to hold it on the tightest possible reinuntil you see its
possibilities, and then after a certain number of
years you can consciously re-plan and re-devise its
finances either along the same lines or, perhaps,
along different lines. These are two alternatives. It
is nothing to do with internal management, or op-
erational efficiency, because you can give and devise
the best kind of financial structure and yet have every
advantage thrown away if operational efficiency is
not 100% or is not nearly 100%.
I was just making that point, Mr. Chairman,
merely to emphasize that there can be more than a
single method of financing a Corporation. You can
either give it some money and say: "Here is your
operating capital," or you can do the other thing
which was done in this case as with some other Sta-
tutory Authorities. We can say: "We are going to
guarantee you a loan of $x million, as the case may
be, and out of this you will have to purchase your
capital equipment as well as maintain and service
your operating expenses." In other words, it has been
undoubtedly the case with the Caribbean Broadcasting
Corporation, Mr. Chairman, that when it was set up
it used, should we say, the same funds, or drew on the
same funds, for the purchase of the radio transmitter
as it did, shouldwe say, for the purchase of a postage
stamp. It had no other means of financing itself.
Now, even so, at the inception there were two
alternatives which Government could have pursued.
It has pursued one of these two, and I think rightly.
It could either have set up a Station with the smallest
and only most necessary service a Station, perhaps,
run by less than a dozen people with very little pro-
gramming initiated outside of what is mass-produced.
It could do this. There are hundreds of Radio and
Television Stations in North America and, possibly,
in other countries which are run on what I call the
shoestring basis small operations, with perhaps
as much as 90% disc-jockeying, and the minimum
proportion of live programmes a closely knit Cor-
poration very tightly financed with no possibilities,
perhaps, of expanding or any conscious expansion
except what lies within the compass of that kind of
I think we could have done this, and we should
probably not now be in this situation, which calls for
the re-structuring of the Corporation's finances. We
might have done this, but I think it would have been a
great drawback if we had done it.
After all, radio and television are in no different
position from any other concern in which you quite
rightly expect growth and acceptability; but the mo-
ment'you set up something which you are consciously
fostering and developing, certain disadvantages
necessarily accompany its growth and its accept-
ability by the community which it serves. If your
operation expands rapidly, your expenditure expands
rapidly; and even with the best will in the world, if you
try not to let expenditure rise to meet income in every
case, even if you do this, it is still a necessary con-
sequence of the growth of an enterprise, and it is being
accepted by the community that certain necessary
disadvantages will accrue if the growth is rapid. We
had radio established in 1964, andwithinayear to the
date, television was established. You could argue that
it was a bit unwise to start the second phase, if you
like to call it this the television before we had
perfectly digested radio, I mean from the operational
point of view; but you can also argue, and I think it
is a much more sensible attitude to take, that if you
are going to have the two of them, you may as well
have them close enough to one another in order that
they may grow together, instead of continually plan-
ning for two separate operations. Why not treat both
of them as two aspects of a single operation and let
them grow together, and watch them grow, and finance
There is another point also. Whenyoulookat the
projections made for these services I am speaking
now of the composite services when you look at
the projections which were made, say, at the begin-
ning of 1963, and you compare them with what has ac-
tually happened, the differences are really
instructive. On the projections made for the first
four years, first on the revenue side, the difference
is only $32,938. I will explain what Imean. Before we
started, it was thought that revenue would be some-
thing like $2,485,000. The actual outturn in that
period was $2,452,062 a difference of $32,938 and
that is not a wide difference between what was pro-
jected and what has actually been the case. That dif-
ference is not so wide. The width of the difference is
more manifest in the operating expenditure. Whereas
there is a narrow gap in projecting the actual revenue,
there is a wider gap in the projection of operating ex-
penditure over the same period. It was projected, for
instance, that the operating expenditure over that
period would be something like $1,862,000, and it has
turned out to be $2,805,758 a difference of nearly
$1 million, a difference of $943,758. I think that, im-
mediately we get the point of what Iam trying to say,
if you have to finance bank charges and other neces-
sary commitments, in short, if you have to finance
your whole operations out of the loan capital, and if,
as must necessarily be the case, the servicing of your
loan must be the first charge on your revenue, and that
has got to be the case, the gap in the operating deficit
is bound to be as wide as has actually been the case.
In short, if C.B.C. or any other Corporation it does
not matter which one had been financed or had
started off with a lump sum grant from Parliament -
we have never come into Parliament to ask for money
out of the Treasury for C.B.C.; what we have done in
the Estimates is, as you will see, we have given to the
Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation an amount which
is thought to be annually equal to the duties collected
on the importation, the import duties on television
receivers. In addition to this, we allow for the licence
fees and if, as the latest set count appears to show,
that there are 10,000 or 11,000 television receivers
in the Island, the revenue from licences ought to be
$100,000 or $110,000 as the case may be, and it should
be the Corporation's business to collect all of their
licence fees, and not $41,000 as appears to be the
case in 1966.
This may be a dereliction on their part or, may
be, some defect in the legal or administrative process
which does not enable them fully to reap the advan-
tages of getting all the revenue from licensing fees.
But this is something incidental that they will have to
Therefore, as I said, Mr. Chairman, apart from
the subventions, if you like to call it so, to be reaped
from the hand-over of Customs Duties and the revenue
which should accrue if the licencing fees were fully
collected, nothing else comes out of the Treasury for
the Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation. Obviously,
everybody knows that the original concept has been
very much over expanded.
Mr. Chairman, you can call this an extravagance
if you like, but this is a point of view like any other,
and I do not say this to denigrate any other territory
or the television operation in any other territory.
You will be surprised to know that last week when an
important religious ceremony was being televised in
Trinidad, they had to establish closed circuit tele-
vision so that people, not in their homes, but outside
the Cathedral, who could not get in the Cathedral,
would be able to follow the service. That is exactly
what happened because their outside broadcasting
equipment is nowhere as good or efficient as that
which exists here.
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Mr. Chairman, on a
point of order. Would the hon. member agree that a
closed-circuit system is at all times preferable to an
outside broadcast? These are technical matters. We
may be technically misled; but if you can use your
coaxial to have a closed circuit system, it is in every
case superior in having an open broadcast. Therefore,
he should not say that theirs in Trinidad is anything
inefficient. I am sure he wouldn't want, himself being
misled, to mislead the House.
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: No, I do not think that I was
misled. As I said, I did not saythis to denigrate any-
body; I am only saying it to make the point which I am
now making that we expanded our operations so early
that problems which other people now have we just do
not have. Technical problems which other people now
have, we just do not have.
Apart from certain areas in this island let us
say hilly, I dare not say mountainous because probably
it would be an exaggeration to talk about mountainous
areas in Barbados, certain risings in that part of the
island's hilly areas, you can get a reasonably good
signal from the television O.B.U. service in this
Now, this is not something thatyou must actually
have, and this is the point which I am making; but from
the very beginning we had this, so that the service
should not be in any way inhibited for want of any-
thing which would be useful for it to have. You can
argue that if you did not have the television O.B.U.,
you would be $100,000 to the good today; but when
you see it going along the streets; it is $100,000 worth
of equipment which you see, and it can be called upon
at any time to do public service broadcasting. You
cannot therefore say that merely because this kindof
equipment cannot always earn its own money it is an
extravagance to have it, because although the com-
munity itself might resent in some instances extra-
vagance, nowhere should we grumble in hearing that
a Statutory Corporation is spending a lot of its money
when it can understand the community nevertheless
wishes to have certain services at its disposal and,
quite frankly, is willing to compliment the Corpora-
tion when certain public service achievements are to
the Corporation's credit, and they are just as likely
to blame the Corporation as to the quality of trans-
mission during a Test Match or any other community
event if it is not what it should be.
We expanded the original concept, rebuilt studios
which not only by our assessment but by common con-
sent of people who know these things are among the
finest in the area. We have done all these things, and
I am saying this quite frankly now I sometimes won-
der why the Corporation does not charge the Govern-
ment. I do not think this would matter a great deal; it
probably is only book-keeping; but when we take into
account the operational difficulties of the Corporation,
I think that we ought also to remember that a tre-
mendous amount of lucrative broadcasting time is
used not only by Government but by organizations
for benefits. I mean, for instance, if it is Red Cross
Week and the Corporation gives up ten minutes twice
a week for an appeal or something just like that dur-
ing peak listening time, this represents a sacrifice of
revenue; and it well may be that if the Station was
purely a private station, it could be calculated that
time given up to Government might be worth some-
thing like thirty, forty, or even fifty thousand dollars
worth in time.
Still, I am not saying that the C.B.C. should be
so meticulous to make us go into the Treasury to pay
cash for the time Government or other organizations
use. I am only saying that when public service de-
mands are met, the Corporation meets them at great
sacrifice to its revenue and capacity. That is the point
which I am making and this ought also to be taken into
Now, it would also be unfair as well as imper-
tinent for a Statutory Corporation or any business
for that matter to ask to have its finances restricted
or eased and not give a convincing exposition of what
it expects to gain from the advantages which it is
asking for. This I know the Caribbean Broadcasting
Corporation is quite willing to give. When the question
of reconstructing the finances of the Corporation and
of providing for the first time operational capital was
being examined, projection was made as to how it was
thought that the Corporation would be able to operate
once it was offered some financial ease,
It was forecast, for instance, that in this year,
1968, assuming that the operating deficits are cleared
off and some operational capital is made available,
the trading deficit would be $184,000, that in 1969
that deficit would be $81,000, that in 1970that deficit
would be converted into a trading surplus of $162,000
and that by 1971 the trading surplus would be $286,000
Now on the other hand, since the increase in revenue..
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: On a point of order, if
the Minister would give way, could he say what he said
about 1967? Could he say what the actual loss was in
1967 and what is the projection for 1968? I did not
catch these two.
Hon. J. C. TUDOR; The 1967 accounts are not
yet to hand, but it is projected that it would be
$336,000 net for 1967, for 1968 $184,000, for 1969
$81,000, for 1970 a surplus of $162,000 and 1971 a
surplus of $286,000.
Now I would also like to say that there is another
side to this picture, because yqu could not project,
at least if you are sensible and serious, an operating
surplus of $286,000 in 1971 unless you could say
something also about the possible increase in revenue
through the sale of advertisements. Now in 1966, if
you take the total amount spent in this Island on ad-
vertisement, the advertising take in the Island that
is to say, what is earned by Rediffusion, the Caribbean
Broadcasting Corporation, the newspapers and the
various advertising agencies, the total earnings were
approximately $2,320,000. It is estimated that this
figure will increase by 5 per cent per annum over the
next five years. Now Caribbean Broadcasting's share
of the advertising take in 1966 was 32 per cent. It is
estimated that this figure will increase gradually over
the next five years to reach 45 per cent in 1971. For
instance, in 1967 Caribbean Broadcasting Corpora-
tion's share of advertising this is the progression -
Mr. Chairman was around 35 per cent; this year it
is likely to be 39 per cent; in 1969, 41 per cent, in
1970, 43 per cent and in 1971, 45 per cent.
Mr. Chairman, I cannot of course anticipate in
these remarks every possible criticism or question
which can be raised. I think therefore I ought to await
the comments and contributions of hon. members, and
then I will try my best to meet their objections and to
answer, because I have nothing to hide. I just want to
say that there is no doubt that you can make criti-
cisms perhaps of operational methods; you can make
some criticisms of methods of financing the Corpora-
tion at the beginning; you can ask why we did it one
way and not another. I think any of those criticisms
could be made and they would probably be genuine
criticisms; but I say this without fear of contradiction,
that any person who makes a close study both of the
present situation of the Corporation and what is pro-
jected for its future can have no doubt whatever and
I say this and would stake the seat I hold in this As -
sembly on this because I am convinced of it. after a
careful study both of the present position and of the
future projections, that the Caribbean Broadcasting
Corporation is going to be a money spinner and a
revenue earner for the people of this Island in less
than ten years' time. This is my conviction, but it is
also my conviction that with the best will in the world,
and the most careful management that could exist
anywhere in the world, you could not have got better
results I mean better in quantum than can be
shown here, because the defect has never been in the
qualify of management, has never been in the lack of
expertise or anything like this. It is my opinion, and I
think the facts will bear me out, that the defect has
been in the fact that no equity capital was made avail-
able to this Corporation, and therefore it has had to
meet its Bank charges and its other overhead expenses
out of revenue. If you have got to do this, you cannot
do much more than limp along.
The proposal now is not to take money out of the
Treasury to give the Caribbean Broadcasting Cor-
poration; the proposal is to borrow to lend to C.B.C.,
to be repaid by C.B.C. and to repay the Bank from
the C.B.C.'s revenue. This is the proposal and I
would like this to be made quite clear. This is no
attempt to substantiate or rather to insist onone po-
licy when in fact it is another policy we are pursuing.
If the Government I know the Prime Minister cer-
tainly feels this were not itself convinced that the
Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation would be a viable
economic concern once it has been refinanced, the
Government itself would recommend to Parliament
that it be disbanded and sold out for whatever we
could get for it. If we were not convinced that it is
going to be a money spinner...... (Mr. HINDS: It is
spinning money now.) Not in the way the hon. member
may mean. I mean a money-making affair. It is be-
cause we are convinced of this that we are recom-
mending this course, and really in the last resort, Mr.
Chairman, the argument must rest on this: if people
who know more about these things than most of us
know would be more than anxious to make a good offer
for the whole operation so that they can reap the ad-
vantages in the near and far future which they know
this Government and this country will reap, this I
would think is the best argument for it, when those
who know better are not as afraid and not as appre-
hensive as some people who think that what is now
the case must necessarily always be the case. With
more money at its disposal for operating capital and
freed from the incubus of the overheads which it has
had to meet, those charges it has had to meet out of
current revenue, there is no,reasonwhy Caribbean
Broadcasting Corporation should not be in the quickest
possible time a profit making concern and an ex-
ample to every such Statutory Authority in this Island.
Hon. C. E. TALMA: I beg to second that.
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Mr. Chairman, this
whole business has a bad smell. The Caribbean
Broadcasting Corporation was established, I think,
four years ago with certain Regulations as to how its
accounts should be prepared, as to how its reports
should be laid before the House, and as to how its
financial business should be transacted. There are
certain facts about the accounts of C.B.C. to which I
would like to advert, but I am going to refer to them
at a later stage. I am going to talk of the general con-
duct of C.B.C. just as the Ministers.
Now, first of all, the question of the submission
of the accounts. Hon. members will recall that last
week the Minister of Finance stated that certain ac-
counts had been laid on the table of the House. It
turned out that this was not true. We went into this
last week. Nobody is blaming the Leader of the House.
I am not blaming him, and Iam sure that nobody else
on this side is blaming him. He is no longer the Minis-
ter responsible, and whatever his sins may have been
in connection with the carrying on of C.B.C., I do not
believe that they include the fiddling of the accounts.
Now, the accounts were circulated to hon. mem-
bers for 1965 and 1966. The Act, Mr. Chairman, the
Caribbean Broadcasting Act No. 36 of 1963 says in
"The Corporation shall establish and maintain
sound financing and accounting procedures and where
such procedures relate to the following matters....
they should be subject to the approval of the Minister
Section 18 says:
"The Corporation shall keep proper accounts
and other records in relation to the business of the
Corporation and shall prepare annually the statement
of account in a form satisfactory to the Minister of
Finance being a form which will conform to the best
Subsection (2) says:
"The accounts and the records should be kept in
such a manner as to secure the provision of separate
information as respects each of the main activities
of the Corporation and to show as far as may be the
financial and operating results of each such activity."
It says that -
"The accounts of the Corporation shall be audited
by an approved auditor appointed annually."
It also says:
"So soon as the accounts have been audited the
Corporation shall send the statement of accounts re-
ferred to in subsection (1) of this Sectionto the Min-
ister for transmission to the Governor in Executive
Committee" and so on.
Mr. Chairman, Section 19 directs the Minister
to lay the Report and the Accounts on the tables of
both Houses of the Island. This is point No. 1. The
accounts for 1965 were ready on the 21st July, 1966.
It has taken a year and a half for them to come here.
The accounts for 1966 were ready on the 1st June,
1967. It has taken six months and a lot of argument in
here before we got those accounts at all.
Now the Act directs that these accounts be kept
in a form to show the separate activities of the Cor-
porations and that these different accounts be audited.
I am making a definite and positive accusation that
these accounts that have been submitted to the House
not only do not agree with themselves, but they are
not in the form in which the auditors finally approved
Now, the first part. The accounts for 1965, just
to give you an example, which is the Second Annual
Sale of Air Time Radio
Sale of Air time Television
Now in 1966 the figures for 1965 are given as a means
of comparing them with the 1966 figures. The figures
which appear as $613,000 in 1965 has been reduced
in the accounts laid in this House to $422,149. In other
words, there are two sets of accounts here purporting
to deal with the year 1965, and these are the figures
which are different between the two accounts which
purport to deal with the same year. The combined
Sale of Air Time; Sundry Receipts just amount to $600;
the expenditure in the Programme Department; the
expenditure on sales, and the expenditure on adminis -
tration all those are different although the net loss
remains the same.
Now, Mr. Chairman, it is significant thatthe Ba-
lance Sheets are signed by Fitzpatrick Graham & Co.,
the Auditors, but the Profit and Loss Accounts are not.
The reason for that is that these Profit and Loss Ac-
counts have been extravagated from Fitzpatrick
Graham's audited Report and presented to this House
in order to present a fraudulent picture of the opera-
tions of the Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation. I
am not accusing the Auditors. I believe that the Audi-
tors have made out the Reports in the appropriate
form and they have complied with Section 12 of the
Act. I am not saying that the Accounting Department
at C.B.C. has done it, because it is well known that the
accounts were in the most fantastic mess in 1965 and
the Auditors had to return over and over again to have
the 1965 figures made up.
I believe that if the figures which, perhaps, the
Minister had in front of him now, were genuinely laid
in this House, you would see that what appears as a
gross in one year is given as a net in the next year
without an explanation. You will see that the re-
allocation of expenses which has been carried out
without any explanation, has an explanation in the
original Auditor's figures. Mr. Chairman, it is not
necessary for anybody to be a lawyer to know that if a
company secretary submitted this as a report of the
figures, it would be naked fraud. Where, in conformity
with the law, do you find such figures as would give us,
as far as may be, the financial and operating results
of each activity? Where is the provision of separate
information as respects each of the main activities
of the Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation? Instead,
we have figures which cannot even agree with them-
selves; they cannot even agree with other figures laid
on the Table of the House. Mr. Chairman, this is
clearly something which is so serious that no House
should be asked to vote on something like this, and
certainly I cannot vote for this Resolution. (Mr. St.
JOHN: Stop right now and let the Minister give the
true accounts.) Although hon. friends on this side are
saying that I should stop right now and let the Minister
give us the true accounts, unless the Minister is going
to interrupt me now and say: "All right, we will ad-
journ the House and come back after the vacation,"
or something of that sort, I have to go on. I really
have to say that political life here reminds me of po-
litical life in the eighteenth century in England. The
Government is supported willy-nilly by obsequious
votes, not always by voices, by obedient majorities
just casting their votes, sometimes not even for
Party interest, sometimes we really have to thinkfor
personal interest, because the forms of corruptions
are everywhere observed by this Government.
I do not necessarily mean stealing; I mean cor-
ruption as it is existing in political life. You buy al-
legiance by the use of the taxpayers' money. Here,
in this House, Mr. Chairman, we have seenexamples
of political allegiance being bought by the creation of
Parliamentary Secretaryships. The Minister himself,
in answer to a question, said quite frankly that you
have to buy saucepan scrubbers in the School Meals
Mr. CHAIRMAN: I do not think that that is rele-
vant to the Resolution before the House.
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Ithankyou, Mr. Chair-
man. Edward Gibbons said that corruption is the most
infallible symptom of constitutional liberty. If that is
so, the Opposition has a lot to answer for, because we
fought so hard for constitutional liberty that, obviously
we now have a Government which, since it cannot rule
by tyranny, has to rule by corruption. It is not always
the corruption of stealing; it is the corruption of in-
competence, the corruption-of wills and the corrup-
tion of ignorance sometimes, because nobody who is
not steeped or imbued with the spirit of contempt for
correct financial procedures, could lay these Papers
before the House. They do not correspond with each
other. Mr. Chairman, no doubt, the Hon. Leader of
the House will investigate these matters; allhe has to
do, let me repeat, is to look at the figures forl965
as they appear in the Second Annual Report and as
they appear in the Third Annual Report and he will
find that they do not correspond. I will return to this
subject later; I will returnto it when whoever is to be
sent for is sent for.
As to the Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation
itself, we have to take issue with the Minister on the
question of the financing of public companies. The
Minister reminded me, as he spoke there, of an oc-
casion when he came in a private capacity to address
the Acton Club at Harrison College on Kant. I do not
mean cant hypocrisy. I mean Emmanuel Kant, the
philosopher, because the Minister revealed that al-
though he was profoundly ignorant of anything that
Kant had ever written, yet he was familiar with some
person or book who was familiar with Kant. In this
case, I am impressed that the Minister is totally ig-
norant of company financing although, perhaps, he
listened to the Prime Minister's speechlast Tuesday
and has had put into his head some aspect of company
financing with which he has attempted to justify the
position of the Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation
today. Companies are fortned with a capital of $100
and there are ways of operating capital by means of
debentures which are loans to a company and
there are ways of operating capital by overdrafts at
the Bank. That is not the case, even although the
Minister may have said so, and persons such as the
junior member for St. Thomas who does not under-
stand whether he is standing on his head or on his
feet, may have believed him, but he could not even un-
derstand what he was saying, perhaps. He talks about
people being authorities on every subject, but, at
least, he can rest secure that he is an authority on
nothing. It is not the case thatwhenyou start a public
company with a share capital of $100,000 that the
shareholders are giving your capital away. That capi-
tal is to be represented by fixed assets and in a li-
quidation, in a properly run public company, the
shareholders will share a proportion of the capital
they own of the assets in liquidation. The Hon. Leader
of the House is, I am sure, unconsciously and seri-
ously misleading the House if he suggests that the
C.B.C. should have started life on a basis of share
capital, and it would not have been in this position
today. If it has lost $1 million, then it has lost $1 mil-
lion, no matter how it is financed. Shareholders in a
company do not say: "All right, we are shareholders
and not debenture holders and we do not mind if our
money is lost." That is not the way that companies
are carried on, and the Minister cannot get out of the
very serious financial trouble in which the C.B.C finds
itself by saying that it had to start on a basis of loans.
Many companies start on that basis.
This Resolution is to appropriate to the Esti-
mates the sum of $2.1 million and, incidentally, a
greater sum of last year's Estimates than any De-
partment spent. The nearest a Department came to
spending that money last year was the Ministry of
Communications and Works which spent $2,022,000.
We are seeking to appropriate, in other words, aF the
largest item of Capital expenditure, a loan to the
C.B.C. andthe return which the Government is seeking
to get for that item is not a return such as the Gov-
ernment gets daily on the money which was spent to
build the Airport or the Deep Water Harbour. The re-
turn which it was hoping to get is the expectation that
the loan could be paid off incidentally we have not
heard word as to the rate of interest which the Cor-
poration is going to pay the Government. We are get-
ting a series of projections by the Minister as to the
hopes C.B.C. has of repaying this loan in ten years.
C.B.C. is obviously going to have to make an enorm-
ous amount of money between 1971 when it starts to
make a proper profit, and 1978 when it hopes to pay
off this loan, if it is going to pay off the $2 million
when its projected profits are in the region of
$200,000 for seven years. I think it is seriously mis-
leading the House also to speak of paying off this loan.
This is a straightforward appropriation of capital to
sink the debts of the Caribbean Broadcasting Corpora-
tion. There will be no compulsion on the Corporation
to pay off; there will only be a simple, straightforward
contractual liability. What the Government is really
asking us to do is to attach to last year's Estimates a.
sum of more than twenty per cent of the total capital
spent last year, more than was spend on schools,
more than was spent on roads and twice as much as
was spent on Seawell Airport. It is more than was
spent on the Prime Minister's Office, and more than
was spent on Home Affairs that we are being asked
to give to C.B.C. on a speculation that in ten years
they will be able to pay it off.
It cannot be done and it is wicked of the Govern-
ment to suggest that it can be done. That is Point one
as to what this Resolution means.
We have been asked to say that in 1967-68 the
most important single item of Government's expendi-
ture is the Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation not
housing, not schools but the Caribbean Broadcasting
Corporation. The sum of $2.1 million is to be appro-
priated to last year's Estimates of $8 million.
Mr. Chairman, there is also a lot of danger in
here of being misunderstood by reporters from out-
side. On the last occasion on which Ihad to talk about
the Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation in here was
that when a reporter came in here, he falsely re-
ported that we on this side of the House were opposing
the Sugar Industry Bill. They falsely reportedthaton
television and in passing I may mention that this was
reported at all levels of the Caribbean Broadcasting
Corporation, but neither this House or any member of
the Opposition has been graced with a letter from the
Chairman, or any of the officials of C.B.C. apologis-
ing for this serious piece of misreporting. I heard the
voice of an hon. member to say that it was not mis-
reporting, but that it was misreported purposely.
Knowing the reporter, I can believe it. He combines
partiality with ignorance in a malaise that not even
Mr. Vanterpool at the "Advocate" can match.
Now, Mr. Chairman, this is a financial matter.
The JHon. Leader of the House is not the Minister of
Finance; therefore I would not expect him to be able
(Aside by hon. junior member for St. Thomas.)
Mr. CHAIRMAN: Is the hon. junior member for
St. Thomas addressing the Chair?
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Iam sorry, Mr. Chair-
man, but I keep hearing other voices so loudly that I
have to reprove my junior colleague sometimes. Now,
Mr. Chairman, the only enemy which the hon. junior
member for St. Thomas has is his doctor.
Mr. CHAIRMAN: Let us get on with the Reso-
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: We are being asked -
this is strictly finance now to approve a loan of
$2,100,000 to reconstruct the financial structure
of the Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation. The fixed
assets of the Corporation as shown inthe last Balance
Sheet as at December, 1966, are $940,313.65. Another
words, you are being asked to put $2,000,000 into a
company that has less than $1,000,000 in assets.Now,
if there is a Balance Sheet for this year in the hands
of the Minister, I would be glad if he would tell me if
the assets have increased greatly during the past year.
My belief is that they have not; they appear to have
gone down because depreciation has to be written
off. On the basis that the assets of the Caribbean
Broadcasting Corporation are less than $1 million,
I have to approach this matter ofa loan of $2 million.
Now, Mr. Chairman, if an ordinary bank is being
asked to put money into a company, it would expect
that this would be a company which has some holdings
of some sort. If you are lending money to a company,
you lend it on its prospects as shown by its record or
its assets as shown by its Balance Sheet; but the as-
sets of the Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation as
shown by the Balance Sheet are less than $1 million
and its losses up to 1966 are more than $1 million. If
the projection turns out to be correct, it would be
$1 1/2 million in four years of operation. Its losses
are more than the assets that it can command today,
so it is not that its losses have accumulated in build-
ing up assets. How can any serious commercial basis
be found for this loan?
I mentioned the losses. Now, as to the trading
losses of the Corporation for 1963, I have not got
them, but the trading losses in the three years which
were reviewed by these accounts are $1 1/2 million.
Let us get this quite clear. The Caribbean Broad-
casting Corporation has lost at least $1 1/2 million
up to the end of 1966. Add on 1967 and it would be
found to come to more than $1 1/2 million.
Now, these are facts. I have little doubt that when
all this debate appears in the Press, the acolytes and
proselytes that parade with the Democratic Labour
Party would find ways of distorting or concealing these
facts. But it is a fact that the Caribbean Broadcasting
Corporation has lost $1 1/2 million and no amount of
sympathetic words can conceal it. So with assets of
$1 million and losses of more than $1 1/2 million,
they are asking for $2 million in new finances.
Mr. Chairman, nobody for a moment, I am sure,
would expect that to be considered a commercial pro-
position, and it is only a question of criticism to the
effect that you could have done it this way or another.
In my mind, we do nothave manyways of criticising
it. This Report makes it clear how much wastage there
was in the early days. The Report which is laid before
the House tells us that they have been reducing ex-
penses in respect of a number of different items. All
departments have shown a reduction in expenses ex-
cept engineering, and Iam just going to say something,
I have not got a word to say against the engineer-
ing department of C.B.C. not one word. The outside
broadcasting work was mentioned by the hon. member
although I do not regard the outside broadcast unit as
being entirely above reproach not by any means.
What the Minister was saying about closed circuit
television, I do not want to press into these techni-
calities. I picked up these technicalities by hearing
them as I was doing slightly different work in the
days when I was connected with this kindof business.
But if some system of closed circuit land lines can be
laid in Barbados and not only those that join the stu-
dios with the transmitters at Sturges, we would have
very much better work on television in Barbados be-
cause the Minister may not understand that when an
outside broadcast unit, for example, to deal with
something that is dear to us all, whether it deals
with cricket at Lords or it deals with baseball at
the Yankee Stadium, a broadcast going into a closed -
circuit station comes over the coaxial cable or a land
line to a proper transmission system and then goes
out from that transmission station, which is an ex-
tension of the closed-circuit principle. That at least
is my understanding, Mr. Chairman, and we would
never really gather quality outside broadcast work
in Barbados until I imagine a system of land lines
can be in fact operated. But I do not know, Mr. Chair-
man. I am not a television engineer.
I believe, for example, at St. Lucy which is only
fifteen or twenty miles away, you cannot get outside
broadcast, or St. Lucy is not covered. I am told by
people who should know that the outside broadcast
unit was in fact of a sort not exactly built for Barba-
dos because it cannot go too close to overhead electric
lines because it gets interference from high tension
cables. If you carry it anywhere to do a job, it has to
be placed far from high tension cables. So I am told.
I would never myself have chosen the efficiency
of outside broadcast unit here as a reason for lending
C.B.C. $2 million. I would never compare the outside
broadcasting unit here; I would never have selected
that as the principle item that made our television
service better than Trinidad's. But there are other
important matters of opinion and I would respect his
opinion on important matters. Whether the outside
broadcasting unit operates effectively or not is neither
here nor there. The point is that we have it and it
costs $100,000. It may add to expenses every year
$20,000, but it is part of the equipment of a properly
furnished television station. You are not running a
hole-in-the-corner station, or we hope you are not
running that. You have an outside broadcast unit;
but that is only $100,000 out of a large loss, and that
unit is represented as an asset in the Balance Sheet.
That is one of the $1 million in assets which you
can legitimately point to as justifying extra financing
for C.B.C. That unit is there; it is not a pure loss. It
is shown in the Balance Sheet as a capital asset; so do
not let us forget that.
Mr. Chairman, whenever the Government comes
to the House and asks for money to carry on any ac-
tivity of Government, as is firmly established now in
everybody's minds, we have a right to criticise any or
all of the activities of the Department to which the vote
relates or the purpose for which the vote is wanted,
and C.B.C. as an operating unit, finance apart, must
Sto some extent come under our lash. Now, first of all,
Mr. Chairman, C.B.C. radio, Ibelieve,is runperhaps
on a slightly less unprofitable basis than C.B.C.
television, but the Minister should not be misled by
his brief again. C.B.C. radio in quality is very small,
compared to radio stations as radio stations go. All
this talk about other stations in the United States
where there is no originating material and is all disc
jockey and so on C.B.C. radio is exactly the same
position. It is gramophone records, canned religious
material that costs very little, it is B.B.C. pro-
grammes, programmes of the Caribbean Service -
in my opinion, by far the best material to be found at
C.B.C., and there are one or two a week, small dis-
cussion programmes which, when they are not carried
on on a political basis, are carried on on a basis of
really very slight competence. There is one good
programme this again is a matter of opinion -
"Fifty Years Ago" which has a wide audience and
which is the sort of programme that the planners of
radio should be seeking to duplicate much more widely
than they are at present duplicating. C.B.C. radio is a
slight station, and that is reflected in the advertising
figures and the listening figures, for let us not ignore
the recent survey of listenership which revealed that
although obviously a radio station is much more avail-
able to listeners than a wired system such as Redif-
fusion, yet C.B.C. is falling behind in the race with
Rediffusion, and advertisers are going to recognize
I am willing to forgive C.B.C. radio a lot of its
incompetence because I presume that the effort is
being concentrated on C.B.C. television. Television
stations are expensive things to run. It would not be
fair to criticise C.B.C. television too extensively or
to measure it against the standard of European and
South American television systems, because naturally
much of the material must be non-original; but never-
theless, Mr. Chairman, we live in an English speaking
country. English is the language par excellence Of
availability of television material, and there is no
other language which has anything comparable to the
amount of television material available in the English
language. I do not know, Mr. Chairman, that I am at
all satisfied with what we get on television. The News
Department makes an effort to cover news, but even
there of course we cannot give unstinted praise be-
cause by the standards of acknowledged news media,
the bulletins are sometimes a little disjointed, and I
fear that in many instances we see the old political
bias which ties the hands of the C.B.C. News Depart-
ment as it ties so many hands in Barbadian life today.
I recall, Mr. Chairman it may be false, per-
haps, and the Minister can correct me that when
the Barbados Labour Party had a protest march from
its headquarters to the precincts of this Honourable
House, it was suggested that C.B.C. should not cover
it. We know that. We know that the Minister said so,
and the Minister is a boy who should know better. It is
one of the penalties of youth sometimes to be too im-
pulsive, but, Mr. Chairman, it will not be out of place
for me to say that I have worked in a radio station
that has had political pressure and that has resisted
it, and that I myself have been in a position where I
have been able and had been supported in being able
;o say to political pressure: "Know your place." To
me, Mr. Chairman, once fell the reporting of a first
race riots in Britain in 1958. I can reveal now that
there was outside pressure to modify the manner in
which we made the reports of the race riots in Notting
Hill, and I can also report that even in so small a de-
partment as the Caribbean Department of the B. B.C.,
we could not be dictated to by persons who for poli-
tical or perhaps other reasons did not wishus to re-
port exactly as we wished to report, and that nothing
in our coverage was ever cut.
I was also at the B. B. C. during the Suez crisis
when very serious efforts were made by Mr. Mac-
Millan and by Sir Anthony Eden. I remember the day
Mr. Lennox Boyd came to Bushe House to say that
he objected to the tones of the Arabic broadcasts that
were going out to the Egyptians while they were
fighting British soldiers. I saw Mr. Lennox Boyd the
very day that the noise was going on over the broadcast,
and this was a matter of a war,not political survival,
in which Great Britain was engaged, and Mr. Lennox
Boyd s protests in nearly every instance were suc-
cessfully resisted by people whom ultimately he could
"fire" because the Foreign Office controls the vote
of certain of the B.B.C. Overseas Services, and is in
a position to cut off the vote, as it has done. The only
instance I can remember where in fact I would have
said there was political pressure was when I recall
the Head of the B.B.C. Russian Service was removed
from his position, but that, many people feel, was
because he wab going mad -a position in which 1 dare
say the Minister of Communications will soon find
himself if he goes on making those noises, because
really, Mr. Chairman, I have forgotten whether it is
Sta-diag Order No. 29(6), but Ithinkthere is a Stand-
ing Order in this House that is directed to the beha-
viour of members who are not speaking.
Now, Mr. Chairman, as I said, at the B.B.C. we
went through all this. I could sit down and hear from
people who during the War were under pressure to
falsify the news to occupied Europe and would not do
it because they said the B.B.C. has to be believed and
it has to be respected, and if you broadcast false news
and it is proved false,people will not take yoa on any -
more than they take on the Deustcher Rundfunk and the
other German Stations. So I have experience of what
it nieans to be in a radio station in the relation of
C.B.C. to the Government. I have experience to know
what kind of political pressure there can be.
We knowof this. thesee are not the only Ministers,
Mr. Chairman, who are afraid of what will go over the
air about them. These are not the only Ministers who
want to exercise political pressure about things. Ire-
member that Mr. Macmillan did not like an interview
with Robin Day; he did not like being asked questions
the way Robin Day asked them, and he was forced to
answer them at London Airport because the television
cameras were on him. He rang and made a noise and
said that he would never be interviewed by Robin Day
again. At the next election Mr. Macmillan was in the
Opposition, and Mr. Robin Daywho had been Liberal
candidate was still in the B.B.C. All of these things
happen. These are not unique to Barbados, and I am
urging that the Minister set an example. He is a young
man and he can think about these things. He must set
an example, because in the long run everybody will
Mr. Chairman, I am going to deal with political
broadcasts. There was a system of political broad-
cast evolved when the members on this side of the
House were fewer in number. Immediately we be-
came more in number, the question of political broad-
casts stopped. How can we understand that, other than
now that more of us are here to talk, nobody is going
to talk at all? At the British Broadcasting Corporation
when the parties began to get trouble with political
broadcasts, they put it into the hands.of the B.B.C.
in consultation with the Whips of the Parties to de-
cide who would get Air Time and how it would be
divided. That was what was done, because the political
parties knew that some day, if it was left in their
hands, they would have been unable to resist the temp-
tation of terrorizing with their majority and this could
only result in tits for tats.
The Minister Senator Sandiford, undoubtedly gets
more publicity in the Press and C.B.C. than any other
Minister except the Prime Minister. This may well be
the Prime Minister's wish, but in the long run, Mr.
Chairman, is it a good thing? When we are in power
we can do it, too, and that would not be a good thing
either. That would not be a desirable course of action
for any political party to have to be forced to take.
Mr. Chairman, C.B.C., leaving out the political
aspect, has some good programmes. I do not think
that the work of Miss Gale and Mrs. Bernard could be
bettered anywhere in the world. She could get a job
anywhere in the world doing that kind of programme.
Mr. Gerry Richards, although I have heard him read-
ing the Italian football scores andhelping us with some
pronounciations that would have defied any phonetic
dictionary to discover, as far as we can judge, does
the Sports Programmes in a sensible way. The News
Department evidently does its best; if it could resist
the pressure of reporting our march, it could resist
most things. I believe that there is a collection of
people at C.B.C. who genuinely do their best.
There are persons at C.B.C. I could mention
other names, Mr. Chairman. There are two young
gentlemen in the News Department who genuinely
appear to be making the effort to give everything they
can to a television service. This is not a matter of
politics, Mr. Chairman. I do not believe that the peo-
ple whose names I have called are supporters of the
Government, or supporters of the Opposition. Iam not
interested in that. I know that there are supporters of
both Parties up there. In any walk of Barbadian life
there are supporters of both Parties, but if I think that
Mr. Richards or whoever is a broadcaster is doing
well and is making an effort to get on with his work,
I am going to say so. I do not care what Party this or
another member of the C.B.C.'s staff supports.
The Announcers, Mr. Chairman well I really
put down some of the faults that we are supposed to
find with the announcing sometimes to the fact that
training facilities are not as available in Barbados as
in other countries. The Announcers are underpaid by
the standards of T.V. Announcers anywhere. Pro-
nunciations go astray. The B.B.C. has a Pronuncia-
tion Unit where no strange word can have a
pronunciation set against it unless by somebody's
authority for that particular pronunciation. If an
Announcer mispronounces a proper name, he would
be called before the Duty Operational Assistants at
the end of the Bulletin and asked why he did not find
out how to pronounce it properly before he went on the
air, and should he two or three times in the course
of a week mispronounce proper names, he would be
back turning knobs as a Studio Manager. I am telling
you that as a fact. Nobody can mispronounce even a
foreign name at the B.B.C.
I will never forget once, when Iwas covering the
London end of the cricket from India, when the West
Indies were touring India, seeing how an Announcer
had annotated the Bulletin of proper names. For in-
stance, a name like Bynoe, which no Barbadian would
think twice of pronouncing that Announcer had gone
to the trouble of telephoning our department, asking
how it was done, and writing it out phonetically next
to the name.
On another occasion I remember Mr. Victor
Sylvester's Secretary ringing me and asking me how
to pronounce Gall Hill, St. John. Was it "Gal Hill"?
I do not know if Mr. Victor Sylvester got it right wnen
he did the request, but at least he had the means of
knowing how it is pronounced. All of these things are
matters of training and matters of procedure, and I
would not expect the Caribbean Broadcasting Corpora -
tion to have an operating system of pronouncing proper
names and other pronounciations on the same level
as the B. B. C. It is mere illiteracy for Trevor
Simpson to be pronouncing beleaguered, as "be-
la greed." He did that week before last, but other
examples of illiteracy have come from that particular
Announcer before now. I would not expect C. B. C. to
be perfect with all of that. C. B. C. undoubtedly does
its best, but it has not always had its best done for it
by its Directors.
Now, if there is one thing I believe, Mr. Chairman,
it is that you should try to give a Board of Directors
to a Corporation like this that really know something
about its business. I am forced, Mr. Chairman, al-
though I am friendly with numbers of these people I
am forced to take the Board of Directors and have a
look at them. The Board of the Caribbean Broadcast-
ing Corporation the people that we have to lend the
$2 million to -
Dr. Keith D. Hunte, Chairman. His qualification
for the jobisthathe chairs D. L. P. meetings; so they
think he can chair C. B. C. as well. Mr. CliftonWhite,
Deputy Chairman. The most that can be said about
him, as far as I am concerned, is that he is an ac-
countant. If it is suggested that his qualification for
being on the Board is because he is an accountant,
then he should hide his head in shame.
Mr. Ellison Carmichael is a nice, decent man;
he is a close colleague in one or two respects, because
we both work for a particular set of clients. But what,
Mr. Chairman, is Mr. Carmichael's qualification for
the Board of Directors of the C. "B. C.? How many
generalised members are you going to have on the
Board? His chief qualification is that he is no longer
the senior member for St. James and he is not Sena-
tor Carmichael neither he nor his brother. The Chief
reason why he is on the Board is that there is
no Senator Carmichael, and there is no Carmichael
as senior member for St. James.
Mr. John Fletcher is a very accomplished musi-
cian, and I would not quarrel with Mr. Fletcher's
Mrs. Cyralene Gale; apparently she is the only
journalist on the Board and I believe that there should
be a place for a journalist. Many people would be pre-
pared to say that one of the reasons why, she is there
is because 'there is no more Senator Gale. Many per-
sons would be prepared to say that this is a sop for
losing her position in the Senate. Nevertheless, Mrs.
Gale is a journalist and lam not going to quarrel with
her; as far as the Public Relations aspects of C. B. C.
are concerned, Mrs. Gale canfill them very well. She
is a person of good presence pleasant manner and no
doubt, a good advertisement for the BoardofC. B. C.
Mr. I. C. M. St. Hill is the Librarian, an obviously
essential appointment. Dr. N. L. Hope; Mr. Chairman,
I hope that the Minister does not think that because Dr.
"Bunny" Hope has Hi-fi sets that he can advise C.B.C.
what to buy, I very much doubt that, Dr. Hope is
a first-class dentist but his best services in respect of
radio engineering, in my respectful opinion, are to
point to setting up D. L. P. equipment in Independence
Square. He does thatwell. He and the Fire Service to-
gether, and "Coloured" in the intervals between the
massaging of "Who Say", have given us some valuable
hints as to how to keep our Party equipment. He came
to a meeting which we had at the Garden Land and gave
us some good advice.
Mr. CHAIRMAN: I would like to know if that is
really relevant to C. B. C.
Mr. J. M. G. ADAMS: Mr. Chairman, Ithink that
there is a possibility that some day this gentleman
"Coloured" may be appointed to the Board as well. I
am not indicating that the Opposition would regard
that as a retrograde step. I am not saying a word a-
gainst the gentleman. I have always found him to be
polite, very pleasant and an extremely straight-
forward person to deal with, and I wish that we, in
our political Party, could command his allegiance.
Mr. CHAIRMAN: I do not see anything about
"Coloured" anywhere at all in this Resolution.
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Mrs. Angela Zephirin;
what are her qualifications? Is she an authority on the
Catholic Church and its doctrines ......... (Asides).
Mr. SMITH: Mr. Chairman, on apointof order. I
am not going to sit here and allow the hon. junior
member for St. Thomas to leave his seat and come up
here and make us miserable. Speak to him or do
something with him.
Mr. CHAIRMAN: The point has been fully made.
Mr. SMITH: Try and teach him some sort of man-
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: I really think, Mr.
Chairman, that the hon. senior member for St. Joseph
was on a bad wicket when he talked about manners. You
must have the equipment with which to learn manners.
I recall somebody sayingthat if the junior member for
St. Thomas had been born in Chatsworth and had grown
up to be the Duke of Devonshire,he would still be an
uncouth lout. (ASIDES). I am quoting, Mr. Chairman; I
am not calling him an uncouth lout.
Mr. J.M.G.M. ADAMS: Mr. Chairman, the Board
of the C. B.C. is undoubtedly a straightforward organi-
zation for satisfying the dispossessed of the D. L. P.
It is not a Board in which, as a whole, you can have
any confidence. The Permanent Secretary, Mr. St. Hill,
Mr. Fletcher, Mrs. Gale all may represent some-
thing; they may represent music, journalism and if
Mr. White represents accountancy, although we could
never have much confidence in him, if it is an
example -a Librarian, journalism and music, there are
legitimate interests and the Government is entitledto
chose its own supporters if it wishes to enjoy all of
these interests. I am not against that; but not the rest
of this Board to administer a Corporation which is
spending more money than any other single Depart-
ment of Government on the Capital account! When Mr.
Carmichael was rejected by the electors of St. James
and by his own Party for a seat in the Senate, he had
to be shuttled off to the C. B. C. That is not good
enough and they have not always chosen the best ma-
terial to operate it. Mr. Chairman, we have to think of
the period under review.
Mr. Dennis Vance, I know Mr. Vance was a talent-
ed T. V. Producer in a field where neurosis was one
of the principal requirements of talent. Mr. Vance
stabbed a woman in aT. V. set and went to prison for
nine months, and was in such bad odourthat he could
not get a job in TV in London; so we gave him a job out
here at $2,000 a month. That is part of the haste of the
Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation. He was so
neurotic that he could not even standup to his opera-
tion, and he picked up a knife and drove it into a
woman. Suppose the Barbados Labour Party had ever
put anybody with a prison record of that sort in con-
nection with the very work which he was doing Just
think of what would be said of us! Think of what the hon.
junior member for St. Thomas think of how, when he
goes to Sturges and tells the people how Grantley
Adams defended a man for shooting a boy, what would
he do now if, we had put somebody in a job, who was in
in a previous job of that sort, and stabbed woman and
had gone to prison for it in England? What would be
said? I will tell you something else. I expect not only
the hon. junior member for St. Thomas, but many per-
sons might say that this could be justified. People may
have wanted to spare Mrs Vance's feelings when they
were here because Mr. Vance showed people signs of
the same neurosis when he was in the job signs of
being a neurotic man, but perhaps governed by some -
thing going around in his head, not amounting to ordin-
ary commonsense and intelligence. We may have
wanted to spare Mrs. Vance's feelings; but not $2,000
Mr. Chairman, that is why we are losing money.
Now, Sir, we come to the very fundamental structure
of the Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation. We, on
this side of the House, believe very strongly that one
of the principal reasons why the Caribbean Broadcast-
ing Corporation is losing money is because it was set
up on an unsound basis. We may have to be calm in our
approach to this, but Thomson put one over on the
Government. There is nothing more or less to be said
about that. The Government was deceived into believ-
ing that the services of a Management Consultant
would be of advantage, and that these services were
worth fifteen per cent of the gross advertising re-
venue for the first five years and reducingpercentages
hereafter. Mr. Chairman, fifteen percent of the gross
advertising revenue of the C. B. C., is a lot of money
for this Station newly starting.
I cannot say what the exact figures are. I believe
that the accounts of 1966 have been fiddled through so
as to exclude the realization of how much money
Thomson is actually drawing. I believe the figures
showed the gross and net figures and that which has
been presented to the House has fraudulently omitted
what Thomson is getting. I challenge the Minister to
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Chairman, I must empha-
tically deny this because I have no knowledge of it.
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: What a sweet reply! I
really appreciate it. The hon. junior member cannot
deny it; he can only say that he does not know. Well,
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: No, no Isaidthat I must deny
it because I have no knowledge of it.
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Mr. Chairman, I must
ask the Hon. Minister not to retreat. Let us look at the
figures. Use your commonsense. The true figures
shown for 1966 are these. Where he has shown us
$529,000, it should be $738,000 and the difference is
what Thomson got. We are saying to the Hon. Minister
to work that out. He said that he has to deny that be-
cause he has no knowledge of it. Look and see if that
figure should not be $738,000.
Mr. Chairman, according to my calculations it
may be wrong the Minister should agree that
Thomson got $110,000 in 1966; $90,000 in 1965;
$40,000 in 1964. Those are the figures. They may be a
little hay-wire. I wouldlike to see what they were last
year, but they must be more than $100,000. However
for doing what, Mr. Chairman? For doing absolutely
nothing; for pulling the wool over the eyes of the Gov-
ernment. What is there in that television station that
owes anything to Thomson? C.B.C. paid Mr. Vance's
salary; C.B.C. pays Mr. Shaw's salary. He is a very
competent engineer. C.B.C. pays the salary of the men
up there not Thomson.
Thomson gets money from the Caribbean Broad-
casting Corporation in three ways. There is an agency
called the Thomson International Agency of which
Colonel Sterling, a war time hero and Britain must
support its war-time heroes operated long range
desert work behind Rommel's lines during the war;
so he must be given a job; he cannot be allowed to
starve; the Colonel's pension is not enough for him.
So this Colonel Sterling who was actually a member
of the Board of C.B.C. at one time is interested in
the Thomson International Agency which does adver-
tising and promotion. That draws money from C.B.C.
I believe it draws certain commissions on advertising
which it places.
Thomson Television International supplies the
T.V. programmes. This can be checked. Even B.B.C.
programmes get them from Thomson Television
International and they have to pay for them. I would
really suggest to the Minister to try writing to Bushe
House. There used to be a unit there with a studio
which used to process these programmes for over-
seas use. I would suggest to the Minister to try writ-
ing and see if he cannot get programmes a little
Thomson also gets a gross percentage off the
advertising revenue, so that if the Government is
losing as it has been, Thomson is winning. Thomson
cannot lose; Thomson gets money everywhere,
whether the Government gets money or not.
Let us look again at the losses; in 1964, $172,000
in 1965, $540,000; in 1966, $411,000; in 1967, $336,000.
That is what C.B.C. has been losing. As against that
what Thomson has been getting is $40,000, $90,000,
$110,000, and some figures over $100,000, which I
believe the Minister can give us, but he is not going
to do so. What does Thomson do for all this money?
He supplies somebody called Higgs, or he is paid by
the Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation. Apparently
Williams and Cordeau are the only two persons sup-
plied by Thomson. They came down here for a few
weeks to do something.
Mr. Chairman, do not let us fool overselves. If
you can make money in television in Britain or New
York, you are not going to come to Barbados. I re-
member the "Elite Standard" running a series once
on all the performers on Television who were making
more money than the Director General of the B.B.C.
The series ran for weeks. I myself and my little
pittance I cannot even remember what used to get,
probably around $700 a month, would be employing
people who would be getting two and three hundred a
month. Therefore, do not believe that the people who
are coming down here as actors, producers, and so
on, are men of the top water and top calibre. There
are people like Mr. Vance who couldhave commanded
a salary. There are people like Higgs, a broken down
actor who exists by dropping around from this tele-
vision system to that'television system.
I still remember the .time when I was at the
B.B.C. There was a job going in Tanganyika as Per-
sonal Assistant to the Director General or something
like that. Nobody would apply and they askedtwo of us
to go and apply. We applied and we discussed the job
and when we realized the conditions, we said that the
conditions were just not good enough. Nobody is going
to Tanganyika to work for $800 a month under these
circumstances. I remember the Hong Kong radio ad-
vertising a job at over 3,000 a year and they said
that it was for Heads of the B.B.C. services, Heads
of the Arabic services. They could not get one to re-
ply, even though their salaries were over 12,100 or
2,200 per year'depending on their experience. You
must not believe that working in radio and television
in a small place like Barbados offers any attraction
to persons of quality. It cannot be; so you must look
with suspicion on anybody who comes downhere from
London or New York. Remember the first Manager,
Watson of C.B.C., left after a few weeks or a few
months, or whatever the question was despite his sa-
lary because N.B.C. could not agree to the racketeer-
ing that was going on in connection with the purchase
of certain equipment.
Now, Sir, we are getting back to Thomson. What
has Thomson done? He has supplied the trainees for a
week or two. Tuition in England is free. C.B.C. had
to pay for its staff to go to England, and they would
be taken around the Thomson studios. I do not know
what is done, Mr. Chairman. I think that Mr. Rudder
got a B.B,C. course. The B.B.C. does not have any
shares in Thomson, but they still give courses to An-
nouncers who want to be trained. Thomson is drawing
money because of a gigantic confidence trickwhich
he was able to pull on the Leader of the House and on
the Prime Minister because Senator Sandiford was not
Rediffusion would have done the jobl for nothing
and Rediffusion, compared with Thomson, has a sta-
tion of major importance in the television worldwith
an important London franchise. Important pro-
grammes are originated and have a substantial part
of the English speaking audience in London.
I hold no brief for Rediffusion either. They can
be as politically cowardly as anybody, and in the days
when the hon. senior member for Bridgetown's Party
was perhaps on better terms with the Government,
Rediffusion could be every bit as prostituted against
the Barbados Labour Party as other organs of infor-
mation then were and still are. So I hold no brief for
Rediffusion as such. I am not inhere as any spokes-
man for Rediffusion, but Rediffusion at least offered
to do the job for nothing, and their offer must be re-
spected. It would not be costing us this money. Do
you know how there is going to be an improvement
in the trading position of C.B.C. at the end of this
year? It will be because Thomson's percentage is
going to be reduced. That is immediately going to give
an improvement. In another five years it will be re-
duced again, or whatever the years maybe, and there
will be another downward leap in C.B.C'sexpenses
depending on how the accounts are drawn, because it
is excluded from these accounts, and no matter what
foolishness the Minister may say, you cannot tell any-
thing about it.
Mr. Chairman, I could never vote for this Reso-
lution while this racketeering with Thomson is going
on. I do not go so far as some who said that Thomson
actually assisted in financing the D.L.P. during the
last election. I have no evidence of that.
Mr. CHAIRMAN: That has nothing to do with this
Mr. J. M. G. M. ADAMS: Mr. Chairman, if the
fact that the people who were receiving money from
C.B.C. are giving it to the Democratic Labour Party
has nothing to do with this Resolution, I am sorry.
I will follow your rulings at all times, but I do not
think the implications could have been seen by you.
If the people who are receiving money ultimately out
of the taxpayers' pocket, as part of the consideration
for that money are financing the election campaign
of your own Party I would not suggest you got any -
that must be a matter for discussion. But Mr. Chair-
man, not while Thomson is drawing one cent can they
get my vote. Where has the figure of $2 million come
from in any event?
Before I sit, I said I would return to the accounts.
I do not want to steal the thunder of hon. members all
of whom seem to be armed with this information, but
let us look through here. Sale of Air Time in 1966
account not divided, bad accounting procedure not in
conformity with the Statute. Licence Fees; Sundry
Receipts $1,080. I would like to knowwhy they took
out the figure of $640 for 1965. Where did the Sundry
Receipts for 1965 go? The Second Annual Report
shows $640; the Third Annual Report shows nothing.
If the Minister can answer, let him get up and an-
swer. Where did the balance between $422,149 and
$613,000 go to? Let us get a little further down. Pro-
grammes $342,189. Where is the division? Where
is Schedule 4 or 5 of the Reports which were actually
certified by Fitzpatrick Graham to show hon. mem-
bers how this money was spent? Fitzpatrick Graham
submitted his Schedules and the Government is con-
cealing them from the House fraudulently. Engineer-
ing $142,021. We believe that Department is properly
accounted for. We have no complaints with engineer-
ing. How come Sales in the Third Annual Report can
be shown as $30,000 for 1965 when they were shown
as $100,000 in the Second Annual Report? Where are
the $70,000? I think it is more than that. Let me get
these figures precisely. The Minister knows enough
to get up and say he denies that; he has no knowledge
of that. What he must tell the House is that he has no
knowledge of accounting. In 1965 in the Sales Depart-
ment $126,000 were shown in the Second Annual Re-
port, but $30,000 were shown for the same year in
the same Annual Report. Who has the $96,000? Is that
Thomson or who? The Minister is goingtoget up and
say it is not true that what has been taken out is the
Thomson amount. They want to hide from us that
somebody has this $96,000. Administration $309,000
There is no breakdown of that. Where is the interest
on the Bank? I have not even worried with this. You
have a figure in the Balance Sheet of $1.1 million;
where is the interest? Do you mean it is borrowed in-
terest free? Does the Minister know that if he were a
Company's Secretary he would be standing inthe dock
on a criminal charge if he showed a loan and then
provided accounts which did not show the interest?
(Mr. MOTTLEY: Lord Kylsant!)
I heard the name of Lord Kylsant mentioned.
Lord Kylsant was a man who had been here working.
He used to work at Gardiner Austin prior to the War
as a Shipping agent, and he went to England eventually
prosperous. He made money out of the War, bought a
peerage and in 1931 he did something very similar
in concealing from his shareholders the true position
of the Royal Mail, and he had to get somebody to ring
up his wife from the Old Bailey and tell her: "Don't
keep dinner for me tonight, darling; I won't be home
for the next seven years." That was Lord Kylsant,
Millionaire, Royal mail agent, and he went to prison
for seven years for falsifying Balance Sheets. That is
what can happen when you are like the Minister and get
up and deny when certain figures are not there. No
interest is shown on the Profit and Loss Account.
Mr. Chairman, I just ask hon. members as one
final mark to look at the account and see if they see
Fitzpatrick Graham's signature at the bottom of the
Profit and Loss Account. That is all the commenting
that is needed on these accounts. It is a wicked piece
of fraud on the part of the Government, and when I
think of how they used to talk about members in the
last Government being corrupt and we have something
like this naked open fraud, and beggingfor $2 million
to cover it up, the only thing, Mr. Chairman, is that
unfortunately we can only tell the Minister what would
happen if he were a Company's Secretary. It could
not in fact happen, because of the particular position
of C.B.C. That is the only thing we are sorry for.
Mr. St. JOHN: Mr. Chairman, this debate arising
out of this Resolution allows us on this occasion to
reflect upon the standard of public morality, honesty
and probity of the Government, and what we as indi-
viduals are going to be prepared to tolerate in this
country, what we as members of the Assembly are
going to be prepared to set as standards to the
younger generation of people in this country.
Mr. Chairman, the Caribbean Broadcasting Cor-
poration Act in section 19 says that the Minister shall
cause a copy of the Report with the annual Statement
of Accounts and the Auditor's Report thereon to be
laid on the Table of both Houses of the Legislature,
Mr. Chairman, I want to know categorically fromthe
Minister whether he is saying that these documents
- and I have the originals of the documents that were
given to the Clerk of this House by the Minister him-
self and which came out of the Minister's bag which
were given to the Clerk are a copy of the Auditor's
Report on the Corporation's Accounts as transmitted
to the Ministry. I want the Minister to stop me now
and answer that.
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: That Is what lam saying, Mr.
Mr. St. JOHN: We have it clear now that
Fitzpatrick Graham as professional auditors have
sent to the Government fraudulent accounts, and if
the Directors of Fitzpatrick Graham do not answer
these charges tomorrow, I am chargingthem nowwith
professional incompetence, professional negligence
and condoning fraud and presenting false accounts to
If what the Minister on the floor of this House
says is true that the accounts circulated to members
are a true copy of the accounts as audited by and sent
to the Ministry of Education by Fitzpatrick Graham,
then I charge Fitzpatrick Graham with (1) Profes-
sional incompetence; (2) Professional negligence;
(3) Condoning fraud; and (4) I suggest to the Govern-
ment that Fitpatrick Graham should be fired from
auditing any public bodies at all.
It is a serious thing. Journalists write in all the
Journals of this country that the Opposition is not
doing its duty about supervising public expenditure.
I am going to answer them here and now on the floor
of this House, and let them have the decency when
they are dealing with the accounts of public bodies to
publish this tomorrow. The Public Accounts Commit-
tee of this country cannot meet on these accounts here,
because the Government has a majority of 4 of the 7
members. I got my "dope" today.
The members of the Public Accounts Committee
The junior member for St. Joseph (DLP) (1)
The junior member for St. James (BLP)
You, Mr. Chairman, the junior member for St,
John (DLP) (2)
The junior member for St. Philip, the Deputy
Speaker (DLP) (3)
The senior member for St. George (DLP) (4)
The senior member for St. Michael (not in his
place), and the other member is the senior member
for the City.
Now, Sir, Rule 54 says:
"There shall be a Select Committee to be desig-
nated the Committee of Public Accounts for the exa-
mination of accounts showing the appropriation of the
sums granted by Parliament to meet the public ex-
penditure, and of such other accounts laid before Par-
liament as the Committee may think fit, to consist
of not more than seven Members, who shall be nomi-
nated at the commencement of every Session, and of
whom four shall be a quorum. The Committee shall
have power to send for persons, papers and records,
and to report from time to time."
I checked with the Clerk today. Three attempts
were made to summon a Public Accounts Committee
by the Speaker, because the Public Accounts Com-
mittee has no Chairman. Any journalist who writes
and says that the Leader' of the -Opposition is the
Chairman is an ignoramus and a dishonest journalist.
There is no Chairman of the Public Accounts Com-
mittee in Barbados. Three attempts were made to
summon that meeting and on each occasion no member
of the Democratic Labour Party turned up.
Hon. N. W. BOXILL: That is not true.
Mr. CHAIRMAN: I take that to be an inaccurate
statement made by the hon. member.
Mr. LOWE: On a point of order. I categorically
deny any statement in which he has made relative to
the Public Accounts Committee. The hon. Sir Grant-
Mr. CHAIRMAN: The hon.......
Mr. LOWE: The Hon. Leader of the Opposition
has called a meeting. (Mr. St. JOHN: He cannot call a
meeting.) He called a meeting. Mr. Chairman, I was
present; the Leader of the Oppos ition was present, and
it was from this meeting that we knew the Leader of
the Opposition was Chairman of the Public Accounts
Committee. It was his intention that he would......
Mr. St. JOHN: That is not a point of order. It is a
speech in reply to my speech.
Mr. LOWE: All I am saying, Mr. Chairman, it is
as simple as this: the Speaker of this Chamber called
a meeting, and from that meeting the Leader of the
Opposition was made Chairman and he made it known
there and then that he would call a meeting at some
future date and the meeting was adjourned.
Mr. St. JOHN: Mr. Chairman, you gave some in-
dulgence to the hon. member to talk nonsense on the
floor of the House. If I am wrong, I checked with the
Clerk two minutes before I spoke in the presence of
the Speaker of this Chamber, and the Clerk informed
me that no meeting has ever had a quorum for the
Public Accounts Committee and that no Chairman has
been appointed. The Clerk of this Chamber, who is a
paid servant of this Chamber, Informed me of that
two minutes before I spoke. Do not come to me with
that nonsense. Let us get this matter clearedup now.
I challenge the hon. member who has just spoken to
bring any record on the floor of this House and prove
that this is so; then the Clerk would be fired in here
tonight. The Clerk will be fired in here for incom-
petence and for lying to me today. (Hon. N. W.BOXILL:
Can you fire him?) If what he says is true the Clerk
would be fired. Can anybody sit in here and tolerate
that an hon. member on an important subject like this
checks with the Chief Officer of the House and is go-
ing to be misled? Nonsense! I checked with the Clerk
two minutes ago, and the Clerk informed me that the
Public Accounts Committee has no Chairman, be-
cause there has never been a quoruin."I checked with
I will not let you get away with this. This is the
propaganda that the Democratic Labour Party and
members on the other side have been publishing. It
is a lie to say that the Public Accounts Committee-
the trouble is that people like the hon. member cannot
even understand the Rules. At first he said that the
Leader of the Opposition summoned the meeting. What
absolute ignorance and nonsense! Do you call that fit
to represent people? I heard you, too, Mr. Chairman,
say it is not so. Are you saying that the Public Ac-
counts Committee has a Chairman? Nonsense.
Mr. CHAIRMAN: If I were to correct the hon.
member, I said it was not so when the hon. member
said that not one hon. member turnedupat a meeting
when it was being called.
Mr. St. JOHN: If there is no quorum there is no
meeting; so how are you going to have a meeting?
Mr. CHAIRMAN: That is what I corrected the
hon. member on. Only two Saturdays ago I attended a
meeting and only the member was there.
Mr. St. JOHN: Two Saturdays ago I came to a
meeting in an attempt to get it.
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Onapoint of order. The hon.
member has just said that he came to a meeting of the
Public Accounts Com nittee. I was not aware that he
was a member of the Public Accounts Committee!
I refer to the Senior member for Christ Church.
Mr. St. JOHN: This is the specious attitude, be-
cause this is exactly the trap that we put you in. When
the Leader of the Opposition was going away, we in-
formed the Speaker that I would act for the Leader
of the Opposition.
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: On a point of order. I really
regret crossing the hon. member. The hon. member
is generating really more heat than light. The Leader
of the Opposition cannot make the hon. member a
member of the Public Accounts Committee. The
House has elected the Public Accounts Committee,
as it does any other Committees. If he cannot serve,
he must say so, and then the House will declare its
pleasure in respect of the hon. member or any other
member. If the hon. member thinks that there is dele-
gated authority in this respect, it cannot be done.
Mr. CHAIRMAN: The Leader of the House is mak-
ing a point of order.
Mr. St. JOHN: That is no point of order.
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Yes, it is a point of order. I
am finishing the sentence I was making. The hon.
member cannot be a member of the Public Accounts
Committee unless the House makes him a member; so
if he attended a meeting of the Public Accounts Com-
mittee he was improperly there.
Mr. St. JOHN: I am not saying that I was a mem-
ber of the Public Accounts Committee. I amnot say-
ing that. (ASIDES)
Mr. CHAIRMAN: There are so many noises
around this Table that I can hardly hear the hon.
member who is speaking.
Mr. St. JOHN: I am speaking on this tonight and
getting it threshed out, because there are a lot of let-
ters in circulation about this matter. I tookthe trou-
ble to check with the Clerk. I took the trouble to get
the Hon. Leader of the Opposition to write to the
Speaker asking him to summon a meeting. I took the
trouble to come over here and I watched myself, and
none of the Democratic Labour Party members, with
the possible exception of yourself, Mr. Chairman,was
present because I believe that when I came here you
were somewhere around. I checked today with the
Clerk of the House and he informed me, a member of
this House, to whom it is his duty to speak the truth -
he informed me that there was no meeting because
there was no quorum. Let us get this straight now.
The quorum is in the hands of the Democratic Labour
Party; they have never appointed the Hon. Leader
of the Opposition as Chairman of this Committee, and
the dishonesty in this is that, unlike any other Com-
mittee on the Order Paper of this House you will
see every Committee on it; but if you check your
Order Paper, you will see that there is absolutely
nothing about the Public Accounts Committee on it. I
am nailing them tonight on this, because it is a lie and
I say it is a lie; and if the Hon. Mr. Lowe, I beg your
pardon, the hon. senior member for St. George, can
state the date and the time when the meeting was at-
tended, I will sit down now and stand corrected. But
he cannot, so that in the belief that Parliament does
not have any opportunity to scrutinize the Government
including the Ministry of Education the Ministry of
Education is one of the Ministries which have failed
during the regime of the present Leader of the House
when he was responsible for the destinies andthe fi-
nancial control of that Ministry, they never accounted
to the Auditor General; so that it is nothing if one of
their Departments, the C.B.C. fraud and crookedness
go on up there because that Department has never
reported to the......
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Chairman, on a point of
order. The hon. member would probably be the most
effective and the most competent debater in this House
if he would generate more light and less heat. There
is nothing to be shouting and screaming about. It is
true that I was the Minister of Education and it is true
that the Ministry and the Department under it had been
defaulting in submitting their accounts. This, Ido not
deny. I do not like it and I must accept the responsi-
bility for it insofar as I was there then, but this
would not be an indictment against me in respect of
what we are now discussing about C.B.C.
Mr. St. JOHN: Mr. Chairman, some people do not
understand Parliamentary Government because I
think it is wrong for me to getup in here and criticise
an individual Civil Servant. The blame must go on the
Ministerial Head, the Parliamentary person who is
Parliamentarily responsible for it, and that is where
I am laying the blame tonight. I could mention the Au-
ditors because they have to be approved by the Minis -
ter. Fitzpatrick Graham is a dishonest Auditor if he
reports what the Minister says is correct. What do
we find? We find accounts presented before this House,
not showing a true statement of the expenditure of
C.B.C., because if it showed a true statement of the
expenditure of C.B.C., because if it showed a true
statement, it would show how much money Thomson
got of their share of the revenue. But they are afraid
to concede that. The only person who has made money
out of C.B.C. is Thomson. We cannot vote for this at
all; we are not voting for this because, by now, the
Government should be convinced in their minds that
the Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation indulges in
expenditure, on the advice of some people, far in ex-
cess of what is necessary. I said so when I was in the
Other Place and the so-called Accountant was there.
I will never forget him. He was a member of the
Other Place, not now, because the Government found
him out, in truth and in fact, and fired him off the
Board. They fired him out of the Senate I mean the
so-called member, Clifton White. He had a big, long
statement in advance and by that time he and Vance
were together and he was the boss; but now he is on
the Board, but I always say that there is a God in
Heaven and the truth must come out. He was con-
cealing them, and everybody was trying to conceal the
true state of affairs atthe C.B.C. even the Ministry,
because the reports were sent to the Ministry ever
since but they did not want the public to know, so that
they could keep them until the last moment. Even up
to the last meeting, the accounts were not cir-
culated to members and why do you conceal these
things? It is because you know within your own
heart and conscience that there is somethingwrong.
Something is wrong; and if you look at the ac-
counts, hon. members have pointed out the mat-
ters, and there is one thing, as a matter of policy,
that the Government can do. It is obvious that the ad-
vertising revenue that you have in Barbados is not
sufficient to support the large number of media that
want to attract it. You cannot have Rediffusion, C.B.C.
C.B.C. television and C.B.C. radio all fighting to
compete for this advertising.
I am submitting that the proper thing for the
Government to do is to form a Consortium. The Gov-
ernment should consider this as a matter of policy,
and offer shares to the existingorganisations, and the
Government should get back some of the capital that
they have put down the drain and still retain a share-
holding interest. That is the only thing to do now. You
are going to have two sets of engineering staff in
existence, one at C.B.C. and one at Rediffusion. You
have two sets of accounting systems set up to re-
cover basically the same type of operation doing the
same type of thing. What kind of nonsense is that? It
would be economically sensible in relation to the total
advertising revenue in Barbados, and why should you
have Thomson as your Consultant? Thomson has been
sending broken-down actors like Haynes; anybody who
looked at Brian Haynes when he was here could see
that he was a broken-down, cast-off actor. They say
that the only people who have a better trade union in
the world than the actors are the lawyers, because
they are always looking out for one another; but the
time comes when you have got to face realities. I ask
the Minister what are the services that Thomson gave
last year? None. How many engineers from the staff
9f C.B.C. went on training? I do not see any in the
Report; and when we talk about the use of C.B.C., I
know, as a fact, that the Minister of Education tried to
put pressure (A MEMBER: This one?) The present
Minister of Education, the gentleman who has re-
placed the present Leader of the House. He tried to
put pressure to stop them from putting on broadcasts.
Well, they are so stupid that one thingthey tried
to suppress was the Barbados Labour Party, a gen-
uine political Party that is interested in maintaining
democracy and they get Tom, Dick and Harry, with
all their beards on the radio, all the time projecting
them; people who say that Parliament is irrelevant
to the masses. That is the kind of nonsense projected.
Those are people whom they have down there.
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: On a point of order, Mr.
Chairman. I must defend the Minister of Education on
this. It would be improper to suggest that the Minister
is responsible for the projects on T.V. or whether it is
Mr. Calvin Alleyne or any of those people who wish to
destroy Parliament. That is certainly not true.
Mr. St. JOHN: Look at this. I say that the Minister
tried to put pressure with respect to the march from
the Barbados Labour Party Headquarters. I notice
the Hon. Minister did not defendhim on that. Are you
saying that that is not true?
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: No. I am saying that I have
no knowledge of it.
Mr. St. JOHN: I notice that the Hon. Minister is
very clever. He is not going to say on the floor of this
House that it is not true. Quite well, I do not mind
whether he knows or not, I make the charge and it is
true. What is more. Everybody can see that some-
body is wrong at C.B.C. Here you have a Permanent
Secretary and he asked to be relieved of it. Anybody
with an iota of sense would see, Mr. Chairman, that
the terms under which the gentleman worked were,
obviously, most unsatisfactory to him and so he asked
to be removed.
But what we are concerned with here today is if
we can find ways and means and I throw this out to
the hon. member to discuss with his colleague for
C.B.C. to improve. C.B.C. depends on its revenue
from advertising. So does Rediffusion; so does
Thomson; so does the "Advocate" so does the "Daily
News". All over the world today there is great pres-
sure on those bodies that depend on advertising as
their revenue. You have mergers; you have large
organizations. In Barbados, there is a lot of media
which has to compete; so see if you can get a proper
Consortium going, with Government maintaining its
share but not carrying the burden of all the capital
that is necessary, like the Hilton Hotel.
Can anybody in this country seriously sit down
and see the magnitude of the financial stupidity pur-
sued by this Government? The sum of $19 million on
the Hilton Hotel, $2 million on this; that is $12 million
of capital expenditure; God knows how much more on
the Marketing Corporation and the Milk Plant. Think
of these things The major pieces of capital expen-
diture done by the Government in this country have
all resulted in a loss.
Hon. A. DaC. EDWARDS: Mr. Chairman, on a
point of order. The Milk Plant made a gross profit
Mr. CHAIRMAN: May I advise hon. members
that the Milk Plant is not being discussed in this
Resolution. I would ask the hon. senior member for
Christ Church to confine his observations according
to 26(2) to the Resolution under discussion.
Mr. St. JOHN: I am accustomed to relevancy,
and if you as Chairman cannot see that this Resolution
has financial implications and one must judge it in its
totality, in relation to the total capital expenditure
of this country, God help Barbados if this is what we
are going to get. People who cannot see relevance of
$2 million capital in the Resolution to capital expen-
diture of a country are saying that it is irrelevant to
say that when one uses that and adds it to the other
items of capital expenditure and all of them have a
common feature, that they all result in a loss.
Of course, the Hon. Minister knows that to have a
gross operating profit and a net profit are two dif-
ferent things. Eight per cent interest on $2 million is
$160,000 a year. (A VOICE: Go higher thanthat.) The
banks will lend the Government at 8 per cent. If one
adds that to the operational loss, it means that the loss
somehow or the other has got to be subsidized; so it
is going to be well over $500,000. Already you have
$400,000 from the Hilton Hotel. What then does that
mean? It means $1 million in losses through loans.
This is a serious thing. We on this side do not
mind what the newspapers say as regards that we are
not performing our duty, we are not goingto vote for
this Resolution as a mark of protest against the in-
competent accounting and the dishonest presentation
of statements by Fitzpatrick Graham, if what the
Minister says is true. If the Minister is telling this
House a lie, we categorically charge and accuse this
Government of fraud, corruption of any order that
you can think of, corruption of any order of any mag-
The Minister says that these statements are a
true copy of the Report and Statement by Fitzpatrick
Graham. He said that on the floor of this House.
Mr. MOTTLEY: Sir, I have very little to add to
this. I am not quite satisfied, never was, from the
beginning, as you know, about this matter. I am not
going to rehash all of the facts as brought out by the
hon. senior member for St. Thomas, but let us get
down to some serious thinking. I would be glad if the
Minister would listen to me. Last week or week be-
fore, I was very proud to hear the Prime Minister
who is supposed to be a big economist and a big
economist is one thing, but one with practical experi-
ence is another say that the reason why the Gov-
ernment was buying tickets from travel agents was
because the Government got no taxes from the airlines
directly, but it got taxes from the travel agents.
Well, taxes are very important to the running of
this country. I will repeat what I said. When this mat-
ter came before this House on the first occasion and
I have never changed my view I make no apologies
for being a Conservative: but even then,you must see
that the most avowed, ardent Conservative willagree
that there are certain services such as Water, Post
Office and even transport which will have to be run
and possibly subsidized by the State.
Today we are asked to back another loan for $2
million. For four or five years runningyouhave col-
lected not a cent. This is hard sound commonsense;
this is not book economics. Not one cent have you
collected by way of trade tax or income tax. You can-
not argue that a service like C.B.C. is an essential
service which you can even begin to say it is neces-
sary for the State to subsidise and run. It is not an
essential service such as Water, Post Office or
Transport; therefore I could never understand this,
especially when Rediffusion offered to run a service
for television and radio as against bringing in Thom-
son and finding the money, paying interest, losing
money and not collecting either trade tax or income
tax. I am still at aloss to understandwhy it was done.
Any Government in power granting to Rediffusion the
right to operate this service in Barbados would also
have the right to say that the Government claims so
much time on the radio, and furthermore your charges
must be submitted to the Public Utilities Board, al-
though this is not a public utility, so that the people
would have a fair and reasonable charge.
In the face of all this, how can you ask me to
vote? You voted money and loaned them; they have
thrown it away. There is another point, Mr. Chairman,
which neither of the previous speakers touched on.
The assets which they have must depreciate, but the
Minister talked about what they would expect to make
in ten years, forgetting that the assets which they
have machinery and soon -are going to depreciate.
To me it is nonsense and stupidness to begin to run
something when you had an offer by Rediffusion to put
it up, pay taxes and do everything.
SUSPENSION OF SITTING
Mr. SPEAKER: In view of the hour, this Sitting
now stands suspended until 7.45 p.m.
Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON: Mr. Speaker, Iobserve
that there is no quorum and ask that you direct the
Clerk to ring the Bell.
Mr. SPEAKER: I thank the hon. member.
The Bell was rung and a quorum was obtained.
HOUSE RESUMES COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY
Mr. SPEAKER: When the sitting was suspended,
the House was in Committee of Supply. Thereto it re-
Mr. SPEAKER left the Chair and the House resumed Com-
mittee of Supply, Mr. YEARWOOD in the Chair.
Mr. CHAIRMAN: On the suspension, the hon.
senior member for Bridgetown was addressing the
Chair. That member, I observe, is not in his place.
Mr. SMITH: Mr. Chairman, the Addendum to this
Resolution sets out that the amount is required to
make an advance to the Caribbean Broadcasting Cor-
poration to enable it to revise its financial structure.
The amount will be repayable within ten years by
quarterly instalments beginning on 31st March, 1970
at a rate of interest equal to the prime lending rate
charged by commercial Banks from time to time.
Now sir, this Resolution is asking for $ 2.1
million. If one had listened to the Hon. Prime Min-
ister last Tuesday speaking on this Resolution in
fact I do not think it was on this because that Resolu-
tion was withdrawn for what reason I do not know. I
do not know if after the Prime Minister withdrew him -
self, the Resolution followed suit, because he spoke
and withdrew, and soon after the Resolution was with -
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: On a point of order, I would
just like to explain that this was done because we dis -
covered that it would be proper to have two separate
Resolutions, one passed in Committee of Supply to ap-
propriate the amount, andthen another abstract Reso-
lution guaranteeing the loan. We understood this was
the proper way to do it, and therefore we withdrew
one and substituted two.
Mr. SMITH: That is very good, because that makes
me feel we had started wrong from the beginning, but
the Minister tried to correct it before it went further.
It is operating in my mind that this Corporation started
off wrong from the beginning, and the former Resolu-
tion, as you have heard from the Hon. Introducer, was
wrong. As a very small businessman, I cannot under-
stand this Resolution at all. They are asking for this
amount and they are to begin to repay on 31st March,
1970; but at the spending and losing rate of this Cor-
poration, I doubt that by 1970 something will be there
to start to repay anything on, because as soon as I
get a little further on, I will prove:to this Committee
that the losing rate is so great that unless we con-
tinue to give the green light and vote money to carry
on this Corporation, it would:not be able to survive.
Now this Corporation is no help to the people who have
to subscribe to it. We were told about broadcasting in
the Manifesto of the Democratic Labour Party, and I
will read it for the benefit of hon. members.
Mr. Chairman, this is part of the Manifesto of the
D. L P., and it states;
"The D.L.P. believe that democracy can
function properly only when there is the widest
possible dissemination of political information
and machinery for expression and publication of
different viewpoints. To this end the party pro-
poses to set up a Wireless Broadcasting Station
which the Government will either own outright, or
become a major shareholder. Broadcasting of de -
bates of the House of Assembly will therefore not
have to be secondary to advertising revenue con-
siderations. The party will ensure the prompt
publication of the printed debates and the circula-
tion at a cheap price throughout the Island."
Now, Sir, this was the promise made to me and
the people of Barbados relative to broadcasting. Sir,
how much broadcasting has been done from this
House? How many speeches were broadcast from this
House to the people of this country? Although they
were promised throughout the length andbreadthof
this country that they would be kept well informed
through this broadcasting system, nothing has been
done. What has happened with it, Sir? The Govern-
ment have taken it upon themselves to set up this
Broadcasting Station for themselves, because you can
only hear members of the Government coming over
the air, or anything pertaining to the members of the
Government. The Ministers with their shirt tails out
and their shirt tails in you can hear them coming
over the air and see them on T. V. The Opposition
has no chance of doing anything like that. The people
of this country do not know what is happening other
than the little bit that appears in the newspapers.
The newspapers are so much afraid of the Govern-
ment; Rediffus ion is so much afraid of the Government,
and in view of what took place last week there will be
less information given through the Press. When you
get a responsible person in this community gettingup
on a platform and tellinglies to the public I say lies
in capital letters a newspaper prints it, and then it
has to pay for it. The person who maliciously did it is
free, but the newspaper has to pay for it. It should
have been the other way round. "The soul that
sinneth," the Good Book says,"must die." In this case
you cannot expect a newspaper to give much publica-
tion to anything, because the people do not know when
they are wrong or right, or when they will be pena-
This is a Station that is run by the taxpayers'
money, and yet the taxpayers cannot and, as far as I
can see, will not know anything through this Broad-
casting System. It is not fair; we have to pay for it
through our noses, and yet it is no earthly help to us.
I cannot blame the Introducer; he is out of it now; if
he were still the Minister in charge, I would have to
lay it firmly on his shoulders.
What do we find now? I am talking to the table or
to the chairs, as far as a Minister is concerned. The
Minister who is responsible for this is nowhere to be
seen, and he does not care either. I will always say on
the floor of this House that it is unfair to us, repre-
sentatives of the people, that inasmuch as it is in the
Constitution the Prime Minister can do as he likes by
nominating whoever he likes to the Senate as a Min-
I am still saying that it is not fair to us in this
honourable Chamber, and it is not fair to the electo-
rate to be nominating one to an office who does not
have to care anything about the office. He can just do
whatever he likes, but the Hon. Introducer will have to
take a part of it now. In some cases he will have to
take the blame for it. In otherwords, he will have to
try to patch some things, because it is not everything
he will know about now. He is no longer in the Ministry,
but yet we are called upon to give the green light for
a loan of $2,100.000 to the Corporation.
I said just now that the Prime Minister, one of the
biggest economic experts one could ever hear about,
got up on the floor of this House last Tuesday and tried
to throw sand in our eyes, as far as this Corporation
is concerned. Sir, the blindest man on a trotting horse
can clearly see that something is definitely wrong with
this Corporation too wrong to be right. The Minister
was very vague on the introduction of this Resolution.
Here it is: the Minister and the Ministers of this
Government are the Directors of this Company, and I
am the Manager of the Bank. They are asking me for
a loan of $2,100,000. They were running the business
for a fair time. Now the Manager of the Bank is not
an idiot. He can sit in his chair at his desk and run
any business that he has to finance. This Corporation
was working for about three or four years. This Cor -
poration is doing nothing but losing money. It is throw-
ing away money faster than it can get it. It now wants
to borrow money, but the Directors cannot convince
me that they are going to expand in such a way as to
offset their operational losses. To continue at this
rate and to borrow this amount of money, it will be
impossible for this Corporation to pay backone cent.
They would have to satisfy me now that they have
a certain object in view, certain expansions, theyex-
cept more sales, more income and this money is to
help them to expand and to help them to pay their debts.
Mr. Chairman, he would be a foolish Manager who
would give them this amount of money to carry on at
the same rate. I do not know if the Minister has in
front of him what plans are on foot for this particular
business to get this money, but, in my opinion, I am
wondering, and I believe I am right, if this amount is
only to pay bills and to clear off debts. That is the
only thing I can see. This money, I believe, has al-
ready been spent because we do not have a breakdown.
In the Report we cannot see the real operational
costs, how much interest there is on the money, no-
thing at all. It is only asking us to enable it to revise
its financial structure. Believe that when this Com-
pany was first started and as I have heard the hon.
senior member for St. Thomas mention one Thomson,
I understand that these Thomson people were to put in
a certain amount of money' into this till, and I. doubt
if they have ever put in one cent.They only started off
with what this Government handed over to them. If they
have put in any money along with the amount the Gov-
ernment started them off with, they could not have been
so far down in the red. These people, so far, have seen
that they can take this Government for a ride, and I
do not know why this Government so much likes
foreigners to carry away the money. It is better to
let the people here carry away this money, but they
believe in allowing foreigners to carry it away.
These Thomson people will pull up their sticks.
The milk people at the Pine are going to pull up their
sticks, and the Hilton people are going to clear out and
leave everything with this Government. This Govern-
ment is going into business with foreigners, and the
taxpayers' money is pushed away; and since these
people cannot see how the tide is breaking, they are
going to break for themselves. They musthave heard
when the Prime Minister said sometime ago that
there were some other boys who had to breakfor
themselves. It is not fair to the taxpayers of this coun-
try for this Government to be looking in all the avenues
to carry away the money and not to bring in one cent.
Now these Thomson people are supposedto be share-
holders or partners, but nothing at all has been men-
tioned or shown so as to show you what they have put
in and what they have taken out, and I am very sus-
picious over this auditing business. The Auditor can
only audit what you have put in front of him. The Audi-
tor cannot sit in his office and tell you directly: "You
collected $100 and you have only entered $25." He can
only do that by checking the receipts and the expendi-
ture and tell you that you are out so much; but if you
are clever to make the receipts measure up to how you
would suit them and do it in your way, if you are a
clever one, the Auditor cannot find you out. I am not
saying that that has been happening in this case, but
something is wrong because what has made me so sus-
picious in this case is this: you will notice that the
Statement was finalised by these people in 1966, on the
1st June, and when was it circularised to us? Nine
months after, and we had to press for it, because up to
last Tuesday we did not have it.
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Chairman, on a point of
order. I should like to tell the hon. member that I make
no excuse for the lateness of arrival of these state-
ments, but I should just like to point out that although
the Auditors' Report may have been signed on the 1st
June, it would have been some months before it
reached the Cabinet. That is a fact, so that while we
can be blamed for the delay, probably between the time
when it reaches the Cabinet and the time it is here, we
cannot be blamed for the delay from the time the Audi-
tor signs the Report, because it has never come to the
Cabinet in less than four or five months of the handing
in. That is a fact.
Mr. J.M.G.M.ADAMS: Mr. Chairman, if thehon.
member would just give way, does not the Minister
appreciate that he is talking abour the 1st July, 1966,
in relation to the 1965 accounts and that it is not four
months but it is one and a half years?
Mr. SMITH: Well, Sir, I can see that the Cabinet
has to take long to discuss these matters, but yet they
wanted us to discuss this last Tuesday without seeing
anything at all. We had to press for this and the Hon.
Minister then had to agree to postpone it. If we had
taken the time from the Hon. Minister and from one of
the best economic experts in the Island or in the world,
according to the D.L.P., if we had gone dumb, we would
have gone through with it without even asking for a
Report, judging from the way he put it. There are so
many things to create doubts in the minds of honest
Now, Sir, you will find that the item, Sundry
Debtors, is increased by $82,000 in 1966 over what it
was in 1965. I am no expert; lam no economist; I am
no auditor; but in my little foolish way I can still sit
down and take up an auditor's report and try to pick
something out for myself. Losses for 1964were
$173,658.29. Those were losses for one year. Now, Sir,
you are telling me that in 1970 you are going to pay
back or that you will begin to pay back this amount of
money if I allow you to get it.
In 1965 losses were $2,119,713.67. These are
losses; these are not receipts; this is not income. In
1966, the losses were $365,998.32. Now, Sir, tell me
what for a business this wouldbe, tell me any business,
apart from the Government business, which would be
able to stand these losses. Tell me any other business,
any other firm in Bridgetown or anywhere else which
would be able to undergo these losses and still want
to go to a bank to borrow this amount of money. Tell
me what Bank Manager, after he has seen these ac-
counts would take such a big risk, because this would
not be a risk; this wouldbe ahand along with the wrist
to be taking such a chance with all of this money when
every year you are throwing it away or down the drain.
Now, Sir, in 1965 ittook $1,004,198.82 in expenses
to manage if I may use the word "manage", Ihad
better say "take care of" $647,599.17. In other words,
you are paying out a dollar to get a cent. That is the
good management of this particular thing which we are
talking about tonight. Well then, we would have to be
more than careful, as I have said. I cannot or I will
not blame the Hon. Introducer for this. He undertook
too much on himself by coming inside here and trying
to hold his shoulders for weight that does not belong to
him. He should tell us straight that "I am not the
Minister; I do not know anything about it. That only
gives me the chance to read out these figures to you
and I have done so." The hon. member has no right
trying to make any kind of excuses; he cannot make
them; he knows nothing about it; he is not in the Min-
These are figures of things, whatever you choose
to call them, that were handed to him to come in here
and read out and he should not'try I would not say
to fool us because he does not know anything about
them. He was in that Ministry before, but it was taken
from him and he should keep away from it, regardless
of the consequences. I say so because some person or
somebody should be locked up or get his face made
ashamed for actions to this House on this particular
business. Nobody can tell me, or can convince me, that
you are going to throwaway money like this year after
In my opinion the Auditors, as I have said, can
only audit what comes before them and members of the
House, having heard what the hon. senior member for
Christ Church and the hon. senior member for St.
Thomas had to say relative to this Statement, can
clearly see that the Auditors only tried to make shift
for this Corporation. The Minister said that it is a
true Report. The Minister does not know; he is not the
Minister for this, but it is a matter for him if he
chooses to be saddled withweightthathe does not de-
serve. He does not know anything about it; therefore
I am saying that it is unfair to us and to the electorate.
As far as this House is concerned, we do not have a
Minister of Education.
Now, Sir, bear in mind in 1965 it took us
$1,004,198.62 in expenses while our receipts were only
$647,599.17. This is a first-class business. This can
happen only because you can come in here and only
because the numbers are over there. You have the
numbers : so it is goingto pass; but this is what I am
going to tell everyone of the members over there. They
must pay for this because they are goingto vote for it
with a heavy heart if not all, some of them. They are
not satisfied with It. I know it and I counsel them to
see that, if it is one time in their lives for them to feel
that they are men, this is the time. This is the time for
hon. members over on the other side to convince their
constituents that they are men because this is some-
thing which they of themselves do not know anything
about, but they are called upon to vote.
They are going to vote but it is not fair to them;
it is not fair to their constituents because a business
of this sort would dry the Treasury. Do you know why
I am hurt? Do you know why Iwould talk on this until
tomorrow? I know the sufferings of the people. People
cannot get their canes out of the fields for the sake of
a little piece of a road and a dollar bill to be spent on
it. The people have to try their best and meet all kinds
of embarrassment in order to reap their canes.
Tonight and at any time this Government can find
any kind of money they want to throw away, and can-
not find a dollar bill to spend on the people of this
country. Mr. Chairman, I will appeal to you only to
tell you this: I went home early one evening to go to a
funeral, and through a lorry having to pull out of a
difficult place because of a little breakaway, the
canes slid back, and the driver had to reverse that
lorry from Melvins Hill all the way past my home with
five or six tons of canes, because if he had driven up
the hill the canes would have dropped off. The Min-
ister had promised me to get that road at Spring-
field fixed the following week, but it has not been done,
and yet tonight money is being voted for something
that people can live without. This Corporation is not
like the Waterworks Department or the Queen Eli-
zabeth Hospital on which money must be spent and
losses forgotten if they are losing. It is not an essen-
tial service. If that closes tonight, no harm would be
done. I am not saying you should close it, but you are
concentrating on things that could be laid aside. Poeple
cannot get six feet of road done to get out with their
canes after they have grown and cared them for the last
eighteen months. What is the cause of it? Why aren't
these roads fixed? Is it money or lack of interest? To-
night the same Minister or Ministers are willing to
say "aye" to this Resolution for $2.1 million, and the
road to which I referred would not cost more than $500,
and still they cannot find the money to spend on that
road after the people have paid their taxes.
Now let us take the Sales Department. As I have
mentioned, there is too much expenditure for sales.
Administration for 1965 was $393,255.78 and for1966
it was $277,177.56. Why should different figures ap-
pear in the comparison tables for 1965 rather than the
actual figure shown In the Profit and Loss Account?
These accounts are not right. Some mistakes have been
made in them, and I do not think that Fitzpatrick
Graham should make out such accounts that we as
laymen can find errors in them. Now what kind of firm
is this? I think I had better go and put my name on
that sign and remove Fitzpatrick Graham's, because
Lloyd E. Smith is correcting Fitzpatrick Graham. I
think I had better go to their office tomorrow and go
through these figures with them. (Hon. J. C. Tudor:
The figures are theirs.) The Minister says the figures
are theirs, but if the Minister of Education has passed
this to the Leader of the House and told him it is
from Fitzpatrick Graham, he would have to believe
him, because the Leader of the House would not ex-
pect the Minister of Education to lie to him.
Hon. J. C. Tudor: On a point of order, there is no
question of my colleague, the Minister of Education,
having lied to me. I said these are authentic accounts
presented by the Auditors of the Corporation and I
maintain that they are. Whenever lam replying I shall
deal with that point which is being raised, but there
is no question of my being misled by one of my col-
leagues because this has not happened.
Mr. St. JOHN: On a point of order, I want to get
this clear. The Minister said in answer to me that
these accounts are a true copy of the accounts pre-
sented to the Ministry by Fitzpatrick Graham.
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Yes.
Mr. SMITH: I believe the Minister, but nothing
that he says in his reply I am taking seriously, be-
cause he does not know anything about the office now.
He is not the Minister; he has to take the time from
the boys out there and if he gets up here making any
hanky panky ....
MOMENT OF INTERRUPTION
Mr. CHAIRMAN: This is the Moment of Interrup-
tion and I shall report progress and ask for leave to
Mr. CHAIRMAN left the Chair and Mr. SPEAKER took the
Mr. SPEAKER: To me the Chairman has reported
progress and asked for leave to sit again.
The Moment of Interruption has arrived and any
business, if unopposed, may be disposed of between
now and 9 o'clock p.m.
Mr. St. JOHN: Mr. Speaker, I would suggest we
do the Solicitors Bill whichwas circulatedearlier to-
day. That would be non-controversial as far as we
Hon. J. C. TUDRO: Before I ask leave to take it,
I would like the assurance from the other side that
we can do it between now and 9 o'clock. If we cannot,
there is no point. I am asking leave to take the second
reading of the Bill to amend the Solicitors Act, 1896,
Mr. SPEAKER: I understand it has not yet been
published in the Official Gazette, and the relevant
Standing Order was not suspended.
Mr. SPEAKER: Standing Order 40 states:
"Second Reading of Bills
1. No Bill shall be read a secondtime until it
has been printed and circulated to Members
and has appeared in the Official Gazette."
Note the word "printed" and note the word
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDER No. 40
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move
the suspension of Standing Order No. 40.
Hon. C. E. TALMA: I beg to second that.
The question was put and resolved in the affirmative with-
SOLICITORS (AMENDMENT) BILL, 1968
Mr. SPEAKER: The next Order of the Day is what
I understand is described as the Solicitors Bill of
which I do not have the good fortune to possess a copy.
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Speaker, this amendment
is a general amendment which is designedto regula-
rise and bring up to date certain exemptions and qua-
lifications for people proceeding to Solicitors' finals,
Briefly, it is not proposed to provide period of ar-
ticles for a person who becomes disbarred by dis-
barred this means with a view to becoming a Solictor
in the following categories as follows:
For a Barrister of five years' standing, or for a
tNon-practising Barrister for five years there is pro-
posed complete exemption from articles,
For a Barrister of less than five years of call or
a Non-practising Barrister for less than five years,
clerkship for eighteen months.
For a person who holds a degree in law which is
not an honorary degree, clerkship for two years.
For a person who holds a degree in a subject other
than law which is not an honorary degree, or a person
who has been wholly exempted from Part of the qua-
lifying examination, clerkship for three years.
For any other person not mentioned in these cate -
gories, clerkship for five years.
As the objects and reasons show, of course, the
opportunity has been taken to state the length of a per-
son's term of articled service, in addition to amending
the Act so that any articled clerk who has passed or
has been exempted for the intermediate examination
should be eligible as a candidate for the final examina-
I beg to move that this Bill be now read a second
Hon. C.E. TALMA: I beg to second that.
Mr. St. JOHN: Mr. Speaker, we onthis side sup-
port this Bill. I have had an opportunity of reading this
Bill; I know of its history, and I have checked the pro -
visions of the Bill in relation to the latest Regulations
in Great Britian governing articled clerkships. This
Bill brings the Act up to date.
One of the effects itwillhave is that it will facili-
tate the entry into the legal profession of a number of
people who have taken, say, Liberal Arts degrees
here at Cave Hill in Barbados, or at any other Uni-
versity. If one did not reduce the period of articles for
them, one would discourage young people from getting
a University qualification in another field and then
coming into law and bringingto it a sense of maturity
and a breadth of education which the legal profession
could well do with. This is not a Lawson Bailey or
As I see it, Sir, it is well known that there is a
shortage of recruits who have the requisite education
and qualification to enter into the legal profession not
only in Barbados, but throughout the West Indies and
in Great Britian as well. Great Britian hadto change
her Regulations so as to allow people who have taken
Part 1 of the Bar examinations, which is in essence
the same as Part 1 of the Solicitors' examination now,
so that people can change their mind half-way, so to
speak, when they get a good knowledge of the respect -
tive work of the two fields. It will not lower standards
because people will have passed the Final examination,
and I will give my support to the Bill, and I have no
doubt that it will get the support of this side of the
Mr. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, this is a layman speak-
ing. I understand that you are amending the Solicitors
Act or something of the sort. It would appear that you
want more Solicitors, but some of them needlocking
up. Now that they are going into the matter, I hope
whoever is responsible for it will iron out all of these
things and put those in jail who should be in jail, or
get rid of them. There are some Solicitors who will
turn you around in a circle. Every day is tomorrow,
and you will keep their chairs in the office hot for days
and weeks. They will not do one thing and will make
you believe that they are working on your matters. It
is time to cry "halt".
Sir, if it is the Cheif Justice, or whoever is re-
sponsible for pulling these people up, I am prepared
and willing to submit names. After one leaves one's
business and goes into a Solicitor's Office, one finds
that at times the Solicitor passes one as if one has
leprocy. Sometimes one hears a lady's voice saying:
"You cannot see him." One must be treated as a man.
When one goes into these offices, one has to pay the
I hope that this will be ahint, and I also hope that
somebody in here will pass it on to the proper authori-
ties. I think my college should go into it, because he
was very willing to push this Bi1l through tonight. I
heard someone say that this must be a Lawson Bailey
Bill, but I do not know about that.
The question that the Bill be read a second time was put
and resolved in the affirmative without division.
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move
that Your Honour do now leave the Chair and the' House
go into Committee on this Bill.
Hon. C. E. TALMA: I beg to second that.
The question was put and resolved in the affirmative with-
out division and Mr. SPEAKER left the Chair and the House
went into Committee on the Bill, Mr. YEARWOOD in thelChair.
Clause I was called. It reads as follows:-
"This Act may be cited as the Solicitors (Amend-
ment) Act, 1967."
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Chairman, Iwant to pro-
pose a slight amendment to Clause l, that is, the change
of the figures "'1967" to "1968". The short title will
therefore read: "This Act may be cited as the Solici-
tors (Amendment) Act, 1968."
With that amendment, I beg to move that Clause 1
stand part of the Bill.
Hon. C. E. TALMA: I beg to second that.
The question was put and resolved in the affirmative with-
Clauses 2 to 5 inclusive were called and passed.
Mr. SPEAKER resumed the Chair and reported accordingly.
On the motion of Hon. J. C. TUDOR, seconded byiHon.
C. E. TALMA, the CHAIRMAN reported the passing of the
Bill in Committee with an amendment.
On separate motions of Hon. J. C. TUDOR, seconded by
Hon. C. E. TALMA, the Bill was read a third time and passed.
Mr. SPEAKER: The next Order of the Day......
Mr. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, you will remember that
earlier today you......
Mr. SPEAKER: Yes, I gave the hon. senior mem-
ber for St. Joseph the assurance that certain questions
which had not been processed when we started this
meeting today, but which had been duly handed in by
him on Thursday of last week and well within the time,
I gave him the assurance that he would be permitted
to ask those questions before the end of this sitting.
(After a Pause).
Mr. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, somehow I do not know
how these papers can get away from the Clerk so fast.
He cannot find the questions. I do not want to hold you
up, Sir; I know that you had a hard day and therefore
I will leave the questions over until the next meeting
of this House.
Mr. SPEAKER: I very much regret that these
things so often occur that papers are mislaid.
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Speaker, I beg to move
that this House do nowadjournuntil 10.15 a.m. o'clock
Hon. C.E.TALMA: I beg to second that.
Mr. ST. JOHN: Mr. Speaker, I wonder if the Hon.
Leader of the House would consider the position of His
Honour the Deputy Speaker, that of Your Honour and
ours on this side of the House. We are quite willing to
come tomorrow at 12 o'clock (noon), the usual time.
Another point is that I do not know what is the reason
for it, but on the second page of the Order Paper you
will find that it has the headline "Select Committee"
but it does not have the Public Accounts Committee
on it. That should be on the Order Paper so that the
public can know who is a member of the Public Ac-
counts Committee. (ASIDES) It is not a Select Com-
mittee! This is a special Committee of this House; it
is a Sessional Committee of this House, and why should
it not go on the Order Paper? I am asking, Sir, that
you give a direction that that should be printed on the
Mr. SPEAKER: I will give the matter my con-
sideration and rule after so doing.
Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Mr. Speaker, the hon. mem-
ber may have drawn your attention to something else.
Since the Select Committee on Pensions has reported,
I would think that that Committee could be discharged.
Mr. SPEAKER: My only reason for not doing so -
I have already given that matter some thought is that
the Bill has not yet been introduced and it may happen
that the matter might be referred back to that Com-
mittee. (Hon. J. C. TUDOR: Yes).
Mr. ST. JOHN: Mr. Speaker, I shouldlike to draw
this to your attention before Your Honour rules. I
have heard it said that the Public Accounts Commitee
is not a Select Committee; but if you were to look at
the heading on page 50 of the StandingOrder you will
see "Select Committee; Sessional Select Committee"
and Standing Order 54 says: "There shallbea Select
Committee to be designated the Committee of Public
If that is not a Select Committee, I do not know
what it is.
Mr. SPEAKER: Did I understand the Hon. and
Learned Deputy Leader of the Opposition to move an
amendment to the motion?
Mr. ST. JOHN: Yes, Sir, we are asking that we
meet at 12 o'clock (noon). Your Honour has to come;
His Honour the Deputy Speaker is not here, and you
cannot have a meeting without a Speaker or a Deputy
Speaker. Everybody knows that meeting at 12 o'clock
(noon) is convenient.
Mr. SMITH: Mr. Speaker, I beg to second the
motion of the hon. senior member for Christ Church
that this House do now adjourn until tomorrow at
12 o'clock (noon).
My reason for that, sir, is that most of us are
business people. I have an important appointment for
tomorrow, and for us to meet at 9 o' clock, it will
frustrate my plans. Let us meet at 12 o' clock to-
morrow and we will accommodate the Government.
Mr. SPEAKER: Unfortunately, His Honour the De-
puty Speaker is not here today, but may I in all hu-
mility throw out the suggestion that we arrive at a
compromise between 10 o'clock and 12 o'clock, name-
ly 11 o' clock? (:A PAUSE..)
There is an amendment to the motion. The amend-
ment will be put first. The amendment is that the sit-
ting of this House do now stand adjourned until
12 (noon) tomorrow. Hon. members who are in favour
of the amendment will please say "AYE". Hon. mem-
bers who are of a contrary opinion will please say
"NO". Methinks the "NOES" have it.
A division was called and the question was resolved in
the negative, the House voting as follows:-
AYES: Mr. HINDS; Mr. CRAIG; Mr. SMITH and
Mr. ST. JOHN 4.
NOES: Mr. YEARWOOD; Hon. J. C. TUDOR; Hon.
C.E. TALMA; Hon. G. G. FERGUSSON; Hon. A. DaC.
EDWARDS; Hon. N. W. BOXILL; Mr, LOWE; Mr.
CORBIN and Mr. WEEKS 9.
The question that the House do now stand adjourned until
10.15 a.m. tomorrow morning was then put and resolved in the
affirmative without division, and Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the