A travesty

Mottley slams Stuart over Wilkinson affair

Opposition Leader Mia Mottley has accused Prime Minister Freundel Stuart of being callous and lacking in empathy and compassion for refusing to meet former nurse Coral Wilkinson in Parliament last week.

Wilkinson attempted to get an audience with Stuart in the hope he and members of his Cabinet would listen to her cry for urgent settlement to a 34-year-old case for compensation for an injury she suffered on the job in 1981.

The Prime Minister later explained that he had listened to the former nurse’s plight as recently as three weeks earlier when she called him at home, having first heard of her in 2008 when he served as Attorney General. He also took issue with the way Wilkinson’s lead attorney Sir Richard Johnny Cheltenham, QC, had handled the issue, accusing the lawyer of playing games and seemingly not wanting to see an end to the case.

However, Mottley would have none of it as she addressed Sunday night’s nomination of policy and planning specialist Kirk Humphrey as the Opposition Barbados Labour Party’s (BLP) candidate to challenge Stuart in the St Michael South constituency.

“What happened in Parliament Tuesday was a travesty,” Mottley told party supporters crowding the Graydon Sealy Secondary School auditorium, adding that Stuart had refused, “to take the time out to come downstairs from your office to speak to a citizen of this country who gave yeoman service as a nurse, got injured in the execution of her duty, clearly at the hospital, and you refuse as Prime Minister of Barbados to go and see the person”.

The BLP leader charged that the Prime Minister displayed “callous indifference” and has failed to reflect representation, compassion, empathy and caring.

“There is no person, whether you’re walking or not walking, who comes into Parliament that you should ignore in the first place,” she said.

Wilkinson suffered a back injury 34 years ago when she fell while climbing the stairs at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital and has been restricted to moving around with the aid of a walking frame.

Mottley gave no indication of any attempts by the BLP to resolve the issue during its period in office, preferring instead to focus on Stuart as a leader “who doesn’t care about the people,” and who has “an obsession with a style that he doesn’t have to engage”.

She also attempted to tie the Prime Minister’s decision not to meet Wilkinson with his representation of his constituents.

“We have come to public life to represent people, and if you can’t find the time to represent people, then you are in the wrong profession. This election is going to be about representation, you cannot have people languishing at the side, not being able to get access to representation,” Mottley insisted.

18 Responses to A travesty

  1. Ronnii June 28, 2016 at 5:20 am
  2. Green Giant June 28, 2016 at 7:22 am

    Thank you Barbados Today for highlighting the fact that she never mentioned the action or inaction by her party to this issue while in power. A 34 year old liability issue against the people of Barbados would have engaged the attention of both parties. The Al Barrac issue would have been another that the now opposition had failed to address.

    One wonders if the media gets the rights to publish all the liabilities outstanding against the people what would the tally be like, what duration would there be, and what social standing would these claimants represent.

    Then and only then can we the people who’s taxes will pay these claims know the true picture of the treatment meted out to us by both sides. I can assure you the scales of injustice will be well balanced.

  3. Sunshine Sunny Shine June 28, 2016 at 7:50 am

    How stupid could be Miss Mottley? Are you just all fancy words and no common sense.

    Any wise leader would know not to touch the Wilkinson issue seeing that any criticism hurl at DEM could easily be thrown right back at you BEEs.

    This is what I mean when you allow that stronghold of indifference to raise its ugly head in you. It makes you do and say stupid things. Real ignorance.

    You are certainly not a wise woman, and not one to be considered too astute.

    • Donild Trimp June 28, 2016 at 2:32 pm

      Sunshine Sunny Shine, stop your nonsense.

      The leader of the opposition is correct in criticizing the PM on this matter.

      It is true the matter dates back 34 years and would have crossed the desk of both parties but the DLP is the Gov’t in power at this time and that is how this nincompoop PM should have looked at it.

      This PM is not a thinker and his refusal to meet with this lady confirms this.

      A banana republic leader.

      • Sunshine Sunny Shine June 28, 2016 at 6:18 pm

        You might be correct, but you are still wrong. Freundel Stuart does not need anyone to point out Freundel Stuarts foul-ups, bleeps, and blunders. He does that all by himself without any help from anyone.

        Mia Mottley, on the other side of stupidity, should have simply kept quiet on this issue since the public took him to task for his insensitivity.

        There are some things you just leave alone and the Wilkinson Parliament issue was one of them.

        Mia Mottley exhibited gross stupidity in seeking to score political points with this one.

  4. dave June 28, 2016 at 12:07 pm

    The Present
    The Present
    The Present
    Stuart should have given the woman a hearing even if it was only a symbolic gesture. Stuart is the Prime Minister of Barbados not of DLP sycophants, sympathizers, yardfowls , yard ducks and Goons.

    We need to stop polarizing Barbados. I do not know how saying that the Bees should have help the woman will help the woman. The woman needs help now regardless and she needs some empathy and compassion . Afterall she is a human being and a Barbadian who would have made a contribution to the development of this Country. Have a Heart !

    • Fiona Waldron June 28, 2016 at 2:40 pm

      Comments as true as John 3:16. I could not have said it better!!!! None of us would like to suffer this fate….

  5. David June 28, 2016 at 3:57 pm

    PM Stuart words were not the wisest used with this issue.Nevertheless,PM Stuart was trying to be politically correct in not setting a precedent that could create problems in the future.
    If PM Stuart had met this lady it would had led to other Barbadians having issues to come down to parliament just to get those issues highlighted. Imagine the chaos that would have ensued.
    Both parties should stop playing politics with the issue and get the compensation package for the unfortunate lady settle.
    Interesting Johnny Cheltenham is/was the attorney.

  6. Carson C Cadogan June 28, 2016 at 5:36 pm

    MIA AMOR MOTTLEY when your party was in power as you all like to call it, why didnt your Barbados Labour Party Govt.pay the Lady?

    You had more than $13billion in vat revenue alone, I sure you could have spared a few thousands to assist her, but you didnt.

  7. harry turnover June 28, 2016 at 6:01 pm

    SSS stop talking SH8……the woman DID NOT come to see Owen Arthur or Mia Mottley …the woman DID NOT come to see Erskine Sandiford or Tom Adams or Errol Barrow…..SHE CAME TO SEE THE PRESENT PRIME MINISTER…….FREUNDEL STUART… and he should have given the woman a hearing even if it was only a symbolic gesture……….THAT IS THE POINT…..THE PRESENT.!
    This blame game,crossing the desks of both parties is another set of nonsense and if anyone is to blame it has to be Errol Barrow…..he is the one who lead Barbados into INDEPENDENCE…if the Queen was still the Head of State NONE OF THIS WOULD HAVE HAPPENED.

    • Sunshine Sunny Shine June 28, 2016 at 6:35 pm

      You would got to be some type of born again kubba. In order to get cheese you got to sour the milk. Thus in order to get to the stage of Ms Wilkinson’s thirty four-year-old predicament, you had to pass through party government reigns of two longstanding political parties. Therefore, you zooming in on the present one without taking into account what the previous did not do is as bias and baseless as your one-sided purport. I just stated that Mia Mottley, stupid, blind, ignorant Mia Mottley, should never have commented on the Wilkinson parliament matter because to attack Stuart, she in return would simply be attacked. You cannot ignore the past when it is affecting the present.

  8. dave June 28, 2016 at 8:31 pm

    I support Harry’s views. The present . There is no getting away from the present. Whenever something is done it becomes the present for that thing. The fact of the matter is that it is not done


    How long did they take to try to restore their salaries ?

    Why are we trying to justify nonsense ?
    Political Blinkers ??

  9. Sherlock Holmes. June 28, 2016 at 8:32 pm

    SSS i am in total agreement with you, Mia Mottley always picks the wrong battles and you are correct, her mouthings on this staged fiasco is pure stupidity.It is clear that this trip to the precincts of parliament was orchestrated, and i am sure anyone with the slightest modicum of commonsense, not you though Dave,can see this ,a top and senior attorney during the Barbados Labor Party administration and you mean to tell us that this matter could not have been settled? Yet you have this blaming of the Prime Minister i say folly,this lady needs help and no one is against her receiving it but to blame the Prime Minister for the tardiness of her attorney is downright ridiculous and silly.

  10. dave June 28, 2016 at 8:34 pm

    I am in agreement with you
    But nowadays we have to deal with some logic coming from some persons who seem brainwashed.

    There is another side to what you have stated. If he had seen the woman and then he worked hard to put things in place that any other matters in general , in all spheres of activity should be dealt with expeditiously by the authorities , he would have made a worthwhile contribution and ensure that matters would not reach as far as his Office. There is something call GOODWILL. It works in any business even the business of politics. Stuart could have gained the respect of that woman and other persons who are observing. After-all , someday Stuart will be a former Prime Minister and practically an ordinary citizen for all intents and purposes. How will he expect to be treated ? I am sure that he would want respect from whomever the authorities maybe. karma !!!

    I do not know how Stuart sees his role as Prime Minister of Barbados but he seems not to be following the Errol Walton model , the Tom Adams model or the Owen Arthur model , not even the David Thompson model , the James Mitchell model, the John Compton, Eric Williams, Denzil Douglas, Keith Mitchell models

    He comes across as not wanting to commit to anything always seem to be shying away from things. Maybe that is his personality but we have come to expect different from Prime Ministers in the Caribbean who for the most part are more hands on.

    His approach is one of wait and see. The eager 11 complained that he was slow in dealing with some matters. Does he reside at Illaro Court ? He hesitated when his predecessor handed over the leadership of the Country. So he seems to be a Jeb Bush as defined by Trump.

    However, here is where Stuart can distinguish himself as a Statesman and here is where he can distinguish himself and his party. Stuart must draw a line / I always maintain that on the night that the results of the elections are announced, that whomever is Prime Minister is the Prime Minister of Barbados . We had an election, its over let us move forward as one Barbados in unity. Stop the campaigning, stop the politicking. Lets see some Magnanimity. This back and forth and blaming the other is not what I expect from a Prime Minister. The only purpose it serves is to polarize the country in the Red and yellow shirts. Havent we had enough of the old school tie ? Yuh mean we are going to burden this little country with the folly of Red shirts and yelloe shirts ? Lord Put a hand !

  11. Sherlock Holmes. June 28, 2016 at 8:52 pm

    Dave you are plain amazing you see no way out for you and your party in this and you are also aware that your party leader was espousing nonsense when she criticized the PM on this matter so you are now talking about the PM distinguishing himself in this matter. The reality check for you though is that he or no one wants any advice from you,you speak with a forked tongue and one has to cautious of Trojans bearing gifts,you do not have this woman’s best interest at heart,you are just on a mission to be destructive in an effort to score cheap political points,it’s in your DNA i hope that what ever you are expecting from your masters as an errand boy in this medium is given to you or we are going to have one angry chap on our hands, when you can come to this forum being truly objective then maybe then i will look at you differently.

  12. dave June 28, 2016 at 10:03 pm

    Some people judge you through their own eyes. They feel that because they benefit from allegiance and support of a political party that others would have to be doing the same thing. Objectivity is not something they know , so they see everybody who has a view as being just as biased as they are . Such persons can be terribly mistaken because there are some other persons who simply want to see the Country doing well and who care about the development of their Country. If they see people messing up and they offer critical support , they are labelled. Some people must sing for their supper, cluck cluck cluck for the grains thrown into the Yard for the yard fowls and partake of the largesse derived from feeding on the fatted calf. Some others bear no such allegiance and can call a spade a spade and do not engage in silly games. $300,000 -Consultant Fees !!

  13. Sherlock Holmes. June 29, 2016 at 6:02 am

    One thing i have noticed though, you are now painstakingly trying to structure your posits in a manner that so far enables better reading.It’s a good thing i am on your case as i see a tad bit of improvement and a departure from the usual ramblings that were previously posted by you.By the way, are you aware of the actual value of the service the said consultant was asked to provide? Do some research and you will see that for such an undertaking and if it was outsourced the figure quoted by you is mere chicken feed,or scratch grain to use your words and stop speaking in a manner that gives the impression that you bear no allegiance you know that all and sundry knows better.

  14. dave June 29, 2016 at 10:56 pm

    You have been found – Guilty as charged
    Sentence : 30 years in the Political Wilderness


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *