Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

shyne wa bailout belize godfrey! that is what the pm said.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

PM has said that he will not pay. This is true. The PM will not pay. In this war with Ashcroft, Belize will pay. Some future administration will have to settle up. The cost will be far more than what it is today. By then, the PM will have retired, commenting from Miami at the sad state of affairs the country is in.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

Thought the title of the essay might have been "Defending Michael Ashcroft".

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

The facts:

1.) Belize is the laughing stock of international markets (since Belize's sovereign default in 2006, it took 3+ years for another nation state to follow suite: Seychelles, $311M. That is how rare such events are!!
2.) Belize's limited tax revenue is being used to enrich "patriotic" Belizeans like Lois Young Barrow through legal fees. If she is so patriotic, she should accept a government salary and become the DPP.
3.) BTL is facing major reductions in revenue and profits while under government control, I hope Belizeans remember how to spell F.R.A.U.D.
4.) Michael Ashcroft saw the BTL takeover coming from a mile away . . . shit, for that matter, every Belizean with a brain and a sense of our own nation's history knows that the Belize Bank is next, and Ashcroft will crucify Barrow once he delivers the new British PM at #10 Downing.
5.) Ashcroft loaned BTL money from Turks & Caicos for a reason . . . now that government legally owns the BTL debt to the bank, it is a sovereign debt (see #1) . . . can you spell another D.E.F.A.U.L.T.??

The rumors:

1.) The PM actually knows what he's doing . . . yeah right! "Di bald head man" dun hit di reef.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

da no barrow, lois, shyne, anwar wa suffa. da di belizean people. when the cost of living increases the poor suffa.

barrow di put di bukut pan di poor belizean people.

mr. dean barrow, love your enemies in case your friends turn to be assholes.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

Can it be that pm barrow is making this grotesque dance so that Lois, Net, the X et al can buy btl because no one will want to touch it?

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

Didn't Barrow mention, when he was proposing the move to take over BTL in the senate, that he did in fact welcome foreign investors only that they would have a cap on their investment as opposed to one person holding over 90% (?) of the shares?

I just thought this was an important point to make especially when talking about Barrow's objectives. I believe Mr. Smith is making it seem as though Barrow was saying that he wanted the company to be fully Belizean owned.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

Mr. Smith, I would also like a piece on how did Ashcroft come to be Barrow's biggest enemy, because all along they were friends and enjoyed a client/attorney relationship. I happen to miss that chapter in UDP Political History on how this enmity grew to such proportion as it is now. I know he became Lois' enemy after she was fired as BTL's attorney, but when did he and Dean become enemies and why? Is it because of Lois?

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

Good discussion so far. *being sarcastic*

Nice to see how many Uncle Toms there are in Belize that are ready to defend the white man instead of banding together to rid ourselves of someone who repeatedly makes a mockery of the Belizean electorate. *being sarcastic again*

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

Re: RAGM

I understand your sentiments. However, as the article states, to defeat Michael Ashcroft, you must get rid of him completely or he will just keep coming back. To do so will require unprecedented levels of asset nationalization and stripping the court of its powers - even amending the constitution to allow acquisition without compensation.. The public purpose used to justify this will be to put an end to litigation. The PM has made litigation sound like a dirty word. People go to court to enforce their rights. Why has that become such a horrible thing? If what you have done is legal and justified, you have nothing to fear from the court. If what you have done is wrong, then you will try to stay away from court at all costs because you do not want your move to be rejected by the judiciary. That will reduce the credibility of the act. Michael Ashcroft is not fighting with tanks and guns. He is going to court. Government should go to court and defend its actions as well. If the Government cannot defend the action in court, that means it was wrong to do what it did. If Belize maintains the position that although the action might be illegal it was correct, then the law must changed to fall in line with the correctness of the action. However, this will apply to all going forward, not just Michael Ashcroft. The PM will then be equipped to smyte all his enemies, including PUP supporters, dissident UDP supporters, and eventually anyone who does not share his opinion.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

Funny, I am not hearing the rank of file Belizeans condemning the PM for taking a stance. I am not hearing the foreign press condemning Belize for what could internationally be considered an anti-democratic move; on the contrary, I am hearing praise from the Economist, the Financial Times, etc. The simple reason is that Lord Ashcroft is known to be what he is, a predator; a man of few ethics, and a manipulator of the highest order. Belize is nothing more than a test ground for his higher ambitions and quite frankly, if he succeeds to take a cabinet role in the Tory party after elections, I expect that his pathological yearning to raise his game will cause him to lose interest in Belize in search of bigger prey. But it will not end well. The Obamaization of the world, coupled with a growing conscience for accountability in light of the global meltdown fueled by unchecked greed will make his quest ever the more difficult. Being a man that will not back down, I predict that he will self-destruct like the fishing vessel, the Andrea Gail in Junger's The Perfect Storm attempting to climb the monster wave.
Closer to home, I will admit that the PM has bitten off a chunk, and will have a hard and probably expensive time chewing before he can digest it fully. If we put in in perspective, however, the gain to Belize, that is to say, the control of the most profitable company in Belize; at whatever you want to value it, even in light of the litigation around it, and even if it is eventually sold at a loss, pales in comparison to what Ashcroft will cost us in the long run. Make no mistake, and Godfrey if you were man enough you would admit it, the largesse of the PUP in it's 10 years of mis-service to Belize was largely financed through Ashcroft's cunning advice, his influence, and where he saw the advantage, his coffers. I will gander to say that today his bank does not look so good. Luke is reputed to have him out some 140M in loans, add that to the Novelo loans, the Pena Loans, and the countless other crony loans that are in the crapper, and the overvalued assets backing them and the picture ain't so pretty. For a bank with a mere 600M in assets, this much toxicity will poison any bullfrog, and that is only what we know of.
Back to my comparison; even if we stay in a mortal battle with Ashcroft for the next 30 years, the legal cost will pale in comparison to the wastage of the preceding 10 years. $US 1Bn in debt and nothing to show is a lot of cheese my man!
It may be surmised that BTL will be Dean's Afghanistan, but I tend to believe otherwise. In the long term, the most patient will prevail, and at some point, even if we lost patience, we will either have to sit at the table and negotiate, Ashcroft will capitulate or lose interest, or he will slowly withdraw his interests in Belize. Any of these scenarios represents a better option than to give him the Old PUP treatment, all the way to the Bank!

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

What about the collateral damage this fight is causing the Belizean public? It is not only Ashcroft who is hurting, it is the ants in the grass. Whereas I am no Ashcroft apologist, I do care a hell of a lot for Belizeans and worry that while the elephants fight, there are no capital inflows and no investor chaffing on the horizons to invest in Belize especially whilst the dust from this fight is choking everyone. What about the ants, Plato? The ants are afraid to even call in the radio shows,because this PM has gone bonkers with power and fear has seeped into the psyche of even th ants.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

Don't be so naive Plato, do you think that everyone is upset over those legal cost? You may want to check the Prime Minister's relatives and "ex"relatives.
The move is not undemocratic because it is populist; the move is anti the rule of law and anti free market. And furthermore, any modern day economist will tell you that few profitable companies will remain so under the control of the most inefficient construct--a government.
And as to why there is not outcry in teh foreign press, has it ever occured to you that they might simply not care, Belize being too small to matter to them. You sound like you may have a touch of delusion of gradeur like our dear PM who might be on track to threaten Obama next for visiting Belize.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

I meant in the last sentence to say for not visiting Belize as he supposedly promised the PM and kissy Kim in Trinidad.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

All this is fine and dandy, but I think after all the dust is settled from the arguments among the Uncle Toms, the anti-Barrows, the pro-PUPs (all three factions) and the UDPs, Belize will still want Ashcroft out. All the technicalities to accomplish this will mean nothing. The "people at Queen's Square market" don't want to hear about all the red tape and procedural hindrances.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

Pray tell RAGM, when last have you been to Queen's Square Market. That doesn't even exist again.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

The measures that the people at BTL are prepared to stoop to befuddles me! I listened with interest when Net Vasquez said that BTL profits will be cut by half this year and that BTL was bleeding under the last Board. The question, to Net (which Jules cannot ask) should have been: "If the bleeding has stopped, why are profits to be cut by half?".

The BTL Board seems prepared to slither on its tummy like a snake in order to try to wipe out Smart, because it is owned by Ashcroft. To them I ask this question: Are the employees of Smart not Belizeans just like the rest of us? Should we support your underhanded tactics in the name of Belize in order to ensure the failure of Smart and the loss of many Belizean jobs? How has working for Ashcroft now become so grotesque to people like Karen Bevans and Lois Young? Will they return all the money they made when they worked for him for many many many years?

The actions of the BTL Board can be described as nothing but an ill-advised "scorched earth" campaign. It pains me to see my people stand up to battle in defiance of a tyrannical virus and, in that call to arms, themselves engage in behaviour akin to the virus they complain about so bitterly.

We are a country of laws, let the people choose who their service provider shall be, court them into change, don't force them!

To Barrow I say, this is the fault of your Board. It is misguided, impotent and detached. The horses you selected are not suited for this race, thoroughbreds some may have been, but their glory is in the past. And like all good retired steeds, they should be left to roam the pastures away from the lights and roar of the races. The Board is in need of an injection of seasoned brilliant younger blood. But please, I pray, let this blood not carry any of your DNA.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

On a point of clarification, Queen's Square Market is now the "Michael Finnegan Belize City Market" as it was recently decided to give the place a name more befitting of the swearing, cursing and wreckless abandon commonly found in the vicinity.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

sorry that should be "reckless abandon"

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

Said Barrow, I will agree that the personalities at the forefront of this assault may be a bit lacking, and that Ashcroft has the smarts on his side, but he always had and it will be a long time until we can match his devious cunning. The PM has the resolve and more importantly, the latitude to make legislative changes to bolster his strength, but that is tricky road to navigate. At the end of it all, there will be some pain in the medicine that must be taken to cure this chronic illness, but unless we stand now, we will live (or die) to regret it. The PM has the mandate today, he is risking considerable political capital to do what I think we all agree has to be done. I truly hope that his capital does not erode to the point that he will compromise and change to an appeasement stance, which has been the PUP angle all along, but time will tell.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

Plato, I agree that something had to be done about Ashcroft and to that extent I support the actions of GOB in taking some of the measures it did. Where my support starts to fade is when BTL resorts to tactics like cutting service to smart subscribers in clear violation of global standards of competition policy. Even whilst at war, countries abide by the Geneva Convention. We must maintain some semblance of order in our society and this abuse by BTL on the advice of a "hotheaded and arrogant" Board is not instilling any confidence in me.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

The tactics used by this administration are inherently undemocratic. Traditionally in this country, the ruling party controls the executive and the legislature. Although they have been able to influence the composition of the supreme court in the past, the Court system has consistently been able to check the government. Now the administration has sought to deprive the court of that ability through legislation. A few examples:

1. amendment to Supreme Court of Judicature Act prohibiting persons from appealing any tax assessment whatsoever without first paying it. You or your business can now be assessed some ridiculous sum and you cannot appeal until you pay. The court can't do anything to help you, regardless of how unreasonable the assessment is.

2. constitutional amendment prohibiting appeal to the supreme court where property is acquired in order to gain access to the minerals under it.

3. nationalization of BTL to prevent enforcement of international arbitration awards against the government.

4. nationalization of Belize Bank debt owed by BTL to prevent enforcement of that debt in the supreme court.

Another example of undemocratic behaviour:
SEL got a judgment against the City Council. The income tax dept. assessed SEL for non-payment of GST on the amounts SEL should have collected from City Council (penalty interest included). The GST owed will be set off against the money City Council owes. GOB has essentially shafted SEL by taxing them and penalizing them for non-payment of monies that they could not collect from the City Council and were forced to go to court to collect. Imagine GOB owes you money for services provided. That is a receivable so GST says you should pay tax on it. However, you can't pay the tax because you can't collect from GOB. By the time you get a judgment against them, the penalties on that payment will be equal or greater than the payment and you may end up owing GOB for services you provided to them. This is legal, but is it right?

End of the day, we will be stuck with these laws on our books. I doubt very much anyone in Barrow's cabinet challenges these things. This is a one-man show that will cost us our freedom.

The PUP administration played fast and loose with public funds, and they lied to Belizeans. But the law was never used under the PUP administration to stifle opposition. The PUP passed the audit reform act. The PUP had the DFC and SSB commissions of inquiry. The PUP put the reforms in place that brought about their own downfall by a strong opposition. The current administration is very good at crushing opposition, but not very good at administration.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

Godfrey;

My question is this? What precisely are you advocating by your statement - "To defeat Ashcroft, you have to take him out completely. Otherwise, he will keep coming back. Anything else is just an expensive game of charades." It sounds like something out of the movie 'The God Father.'

I'm somewhat amazed by your "perceived" insight of Michael Ashcroft's upbringing and it's affect on him as a person. Just how is it you know, ..."that bred a degree of emotional detachment." And, why is it you believe having a degree of emotional detachment is a bad thing? And, what in the world is wrong for someone not wanting to "settle" to be paid at an hourly rate?

Where would our world be today if everyone "settled" for mediocrity? I could be wrong, but I doubt you would be in your position if you had followed that course. I'm also curious how a man of such young age as yourself could have held so many political positions in so few years of service - the youngest this, the youngest that. It sounds like you would hardly had time to get your feet "wet" in any of them, much less accomplish anything of major importance - Attorney General, Foreign Minister, Foreign Trade Minister, Minister of Defence, Minister of Information, Minister of Tourism and then in 2005 a Deputy Leader. That's seven positions in five or so years. In the US we refer to individuals like that as a, 'Jack of All Trades, but master of none.'

Your description of Mr. Ashcroft, "He is unsettlingly, uncannily patient, plays the long game and is a dogged, relentless pursuer. His approach is methodical, multi-layered, sweeping and sustained.", is a prime example of many great business and political men throughout the history of the world. It's the perfect, definitive description of the attributes necessary for success in a democratic, free market society.

As merely an occasional vacationer to Belize I'm in no position to speak to the countries woes, it's governmental problems or the fight against Mr. Ashcroft. I am however, in position to speak in regard to any governments "nationalization" of private industry. We're experiencing similar Socialistic acts by the Barack Hussein Obama administration in the United States and it is quite unsettling to many Americans. I have deep rooted concerns as to the damage our current government rulers are in position to inflect upon our country. Our current direction is not what was intended by our Founding Fathers.

I've enjoyed visiting Belize (mainland and Ambergris Caye), and delight in the cultural variety and diversity and have found most everyone pleasant and accommodating. However, my perspective is only through the eyes of a tourist. If you were to visit New York, Chicago or Los Angeles for a week your perspective would be quite different than that of the public. Such is mine of Belize.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

Hugh,

Touche!

You got the point.

Here are the answers to your questions.

Taking him out meant nationalizing all his various businesses. An obviously ridiculous notion designed to get the government to rethink the "war"that will bog it down for years.

I know Aschcroft's life because, as a friend, he told me.

I didn't want to change around portfolios, but the PM adopted a "musical chairs" approach to cabinet seats. That alone tells you the political level of the country. So yes, I acquired a smattering of knowledge but expertise in nothing and achieved very little.

I agree that the traits of Ashcroft are traits that the world's best politicians and businessmen have. You know that, but most Belizeans will be revulsed by the thought. That is why we will languish indefinitely as a beggarly, mediocre nation of retards.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

Re. Godfrey Smith

Mr. Smith. No need to be so polite. Tell us how you really feel.

Defeating Michael Ashcroft at what cost

Let's face the facts Belize has become dependent on Michael Ashcroft and our economy could collapse if he pulls out of Belize. It is important that we understand that Ashcroft is a business man a real
'capitalist" and will make as much money as he can while keeping wiht the limits of the law and in some instances might even cross it. As a corporate citizen of Belize his companies could have been ethical but there is no such law that requires ethical behavior from companies. It is important that the administration step back and take a look at the damage they are doing by going after this man. Belize has more to loose than he does and we won't win. Instead the government should look at all his investments and figure out what they think he can do better in the interest of the company sit down with him and work it out. Barrow needs to stop making this thing look personal after all it's just business. We have more to gain with him as an ally than as a foe. Set up an Ashcrofft task force with smart Belizean people take out the political agenda and please ignore the amandala bias (those guys make no sense they made a business decision to borrow and now they don't want to honor their initial agreement shame on them) anayze what he has been doing and sit down with him to address what he needs to do to improve the economy of Belize. Politicans stop taking his money. I am sure that he is a reasonable man and will be willing to sit down and negotiate and imrpove in building a better business relationship with the country of Belize. That's just the way I feel about the whole thing.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

Amandala could seh what deh want! They were built on Ashcroft Money.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

Godfrey, yuh admit that in 10 years in cabinet yuh achieved nothing and noh yuh turn around and call we Belizeans retards!!! Bwai, speak fi yuhself. Look like this friendship with Ashcroft di cause yuh fuh adopt his condescending, colonial attitude towards us Belizeans.

Re: Defeating Michael Ashcroft

Unu cyant see dat da nuh Godfrey write da ansa?