MPs tightlipped on House Speaker controversy

One week after Speaker of the House Michael Carrington recused himself over a legal dispute with a former client, the Committee of Privileges held its first hearing on the matter.

But all of the parliamentarians who attended the one-hour session have declined to disclose the nature or outcome of the discussions.

It is understood, however, that another meeting would be convened next Monday.

Carrington, who normally chairs the committee, was absent for today’s 10 a.m. meeting.

Speaker of the House Michael Carrington.
Speaker of the House Michael Carrington.

Barbados TODAY understands that Leader of Opposition Business in the House of Assembly and St Michael South East MP Santia Bradshaw who had challenged Carrington presiding over last Tuesday’s sitting of the House, St Michael East MP Trevor Prescod, St Michael North MP Ronald Toppin, Attorney General and St Philip North MP Adriel Brathwaite, and Minister of Agriculture and St Philip West MP Dr David Estwick, all met under the chairmanship of St John MP and Deputy Speaker Mara Thompson.

When members emerged from the meeting, they were mum, insisting that they were sworn to secrecy.

Two weeks ago, it was reported that a High Court judge ordered Carrington to pay his former client, John Griffiths, an outstanding $210,000 from the sale of land.

When Parliament resumed hearings following the Christmas recess last Tuesday, Bradshaw raised the issue saying it was a matter of “public concern” and she pressed the Speaker to explain the circumstances surrounding the case.

Carrington, an attorney-at-law, instead gave way to his deputy, Thompson, and left the House of Assembly chamber.

According to an affidavit filed by Griffiths, who was represented by the law firm George Walton Payne and Company, Carrington had repeatedly ignored requests for settlement.

In an interview with Barbados TODAY, the 78-year-old man said he would go after Carrington’s assets to recover the money if he had to.

12 Responses to MPs tightlipped on House Speaker controversy

  1. Andrea Jordan
    Andrea Jordan January 20, 2015 at 1:47 am

    Why am I not surprised?

  2. Jay Boyle January 20, 2015 at 3:20 am

    Yes he should go after him

  3. Veroniva Boyce
    Veroniva Boyce January 20, 2015 at 3:52 am

    The man got no shame. After seeing the photo fit of Mr Dishonesty of the house I hope the citizens keep well clear of him.

  4. Andrew The Voice January 20, 2015 at 6:40 am

    This is really a simple matter to resolve, why all the secrecy, if he was dishonest & kept the guys money, then he should be disbarred, and kicked from parliament, now if its an honest mistake ,and they do happen, why don’t he just say that and do the right thing give the guy his dough and lets move on, we have much more important things to deal with, and NOT add more BS to the mix.

  5. Louise King
    Louise King January 20, 2015 at 6:54 am

    House of parliament super story—if one get truth in one,s mind , only truth can come forth–from U—if U get lie-[sin] in U -only lies can come forth from U—it is a big mess—one bad apple spoil de 15 apples—god bless

  6. Rawle Maycock
    Rawle Maycock January 20, 2015 at 7:08 am

    Imagine, the SPEAKER is before the court in a matter for with holding a client funds an the media terms it a controversy, I’ve never heard in my life yet about a dishonest situation that’s termed as that.

  7. Arlita Strose
    Arlita Strose January 20, 2015 at 8:31 am


  8. C B B January 20, 2015 at 10:33 am

    When the Speaker of the House, ducked the issue by recusing himself from that sitting, does that mean he remains “recused” for all further sittings, until the Priviledges Committee has made a decision as to his future as Speaker of the house? OR Mr. Carrington in his personal capacity as a lawyer repays his client Mr. Griffith and obtains a release. Having done that all is forgiven?

  9. Mac10 January 20, 2015 at 12:59 pm

    Of course they are!!!!

    Half of them are guilty of the same thing or worse!!

  10. Patricia Walcott January 20, 2015 at 2:48 pm

    Money they say is the root of all evil. The rich will rob the poor blind without conscience. The nice thing about life is when the time comes for us to take our departure from this world, we take with us the clothes on our backs so why sell your soul for something you cant take with you?

  11. O. Gittens January 20, 2015 at 7:43 pm

    Yes the speaker should resign and remove himself from all the house duties.

  12. Rawle Maycock January 25, 2015 at 1:08 am

    What people except, in Barbados is not excepted in the wider world, as for as I am aware , a lawyer, who cannot or will not give you money that he or she is holding on your behalf and to which you are entitled, or will not provide you a complete written accounting for the money maybe discipline.


Leave a Reply

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