Thursday, May 31, 2012

Revisiting the King/St. Catherine Saga

36 comments:

Anonymous said...

The entire society is to blame. The fish rots from its head. Had king not be a square peg in a wrong hole, he would surely well know that the figures were suspect. No smarts.

Anyone in government today, who does not know how to treat stats like GDP data as largely provisional is an incompetent jackass.

Next, as minister of finance, anything that goes wrong in that ministry, the minister and not the civil servant is to blame. The buck stops there.

St. Catherine is the victim in this situation. King is doing the CYA here.

No matter how you want to twist it and turn it, if we elect jackass MPs and we get jackass governments. Plain and simple.

Now because the department failed with the collection of just one statistic does not mean that the entire department's work in other areas is suspect. If the people in the society that did not give the data for compilation are as much to blame for the lopsided provisional GDP figure.

The borbolist mentality in St. Lucia is to blame for that. Somebody is always hiding something.

As for King, this is just another example of the operations of this post turtle. We know that he did not belong there as PM, and as Finance Minister.

It looked kind of odd that a country's prime minister would have another jackass climbing over his back on stage as public entertainment. Go figure.

Anonymous said...

So sad, St. Lucians, Edwin St. Catherine was catapulted into that department to do a master's bidding. Was it Ausbert D'Auvergne or was it Dwight Venner?.

Then there is Isaac Anhony, again catapulted in positions overnight, again, by D'Auvergne and Venner. These guys are paying the price for the wretchedness they have promoted. Round pegs in square holes.

Right now folks have been fed up with Venner for a very long time at the ECCB. Folks cannot wait to see him go.

So now where does that lack of confidence in GDP data, leave the Eastern Caribbean Central Bank in terms of confidence. One thing is sure, whatever that is done in darkness must one day come to light.

The ECCB according to one newspaper quoted the then Prime Minister as saying, that the ECCB was itself projecting some 5.4% growth. Even higher than what St. Catherine gave. Ain't that interesting. Very interesting indeed.

And who's responsible for pushing St. Catherine up and down the Region working as a Consultant whilst in employment as Director of Statistics with the Government of St. Lucia. Ain't that interesting?. Time will surely tell. We await some more exposures.

Anonymous said...

The way St. Lucia has been governed in the past 20 years or more, is disgusting!

We have just had convoys of reprobates being called honourable when we all know that they were such dishonourable bastards!

Anonymous said...

Senator Dr.Ubaldus gave an excellent presentation in the house on GDP etc...why not consult him further on such matters to ensure that we are treading the right path to economic growth?

Anonymous said...

I believe Dr. Ubaldus is an educated man. He probably should have received a better appointment, I don't know. I think he has the potential to be a real leader in St. Lucian politics. Someone is constantly on here, singing Dr. Ubaldus's praises and using every opportunity to bring him up and campaign for him. This is getting kinda tiring and sickening (to me). I like Dr. Ubaldus and I think he has potential but please stop the campaigning. Stop trying to shove him down our throats. It might have the opposite result.

Anonymous said...

This is called adoration. It stopped being admiration long time ago. But it is nauseating however capable the man may be.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous # 1 its square pegs in round hole. Furthermore, your writing sucks. How can you analyze someones intellectual when yours is suspect? smh

Anonymous said...

St. Lucia is idiot country really! Here @ May 31, 2012 10:39 PM is someone criticizing another St. Lucian for poor writing skills and the jackass is just as bad. He or she does not know about when to use the " '" in writing. Pot is calling the kettle black. St. Lucia is idiot country they say. These idiots just keep on proving this every day.

Anonymous said...

I agree, above. His writing is worse, even!...Rather than commenting constructively on #1's writing, the idiotic jackass, as you termed him/her, choose to personally attcked #1...mem bet, mem pwell - just different days!

Anonymous said...

Micah, let us not forget that St. Catherine warned that Jackass Accidental Prime Minister King that the figures were not reliable. King was WARNED, in writing, in black and white! He still chose to use the figures, trying to get praise, telling the people the LIES he just loves so much. So, why should St. Catherine lose his job over that? Can you imagine what would happen to the Civil Service if a civil servant has to lose his job every time a jackass Prime Minister or a jackass minister makes his mistakes and blames the workers? Like one of the bloggers said, the buck stops with the boss, not the worker. Stay in your position St. Catherine, stay in your section my man. Let's see what the jackass King will do now when the Taiwanese gifts dry out. Where will he work after Richard takes over the leadership of the Party from him? I guess Big Chas will give him a job as Superviser at Gablewoods Supermarket right? He can't get a job in the Statistics office for sure, except as Mr. St. Catherine's messenger boy. CHOOPS!

Anonymous said...

Folks remember there's a fundamental difference between an economist and a statistician. The latter cannot effectively perfom the function of the former and vice versa. Moreover, a head of department has the moral and professional responsibility to advice and/or provide his own head of department with the CORRECT information. Information that is considered or known to be incorrect, faulty or suspect must not be given. Edwin, as a known supporter of the then opposition party, should have been a lot more careful.

Anonymous said...

@June 1, 2012 10:53 AM

'... a fundamental difference between an economist and a statistician. ' Oh really?

Says who?

As an honors graduate in Economics, I had to do a full-blown course in Economic Statistics. I repeat. Economic Statistics.

Economic Statistics is an integral part of Economics.

Later, I had to use the knowledge gained from that course in rebuilding data to create a time series by recalibrating the data with a splicing index.

King was too much unsuitable for the job of Minister of Finance. Apparently he did not gain any passes in Mathematics nor Statistics.

He had to parrot everything that was presented to him. Right or wrong he repeated it all, and obviously without much comprehension.

Yet to use figures handed to you intelligently, a manager or superior must know all the major underlying assumptions behind the figures or data handed to you. That is a prerequisite for all management positions say in more developed economies or cultural settings.

King being our PM and Minister re-enforces the level of backwardness behind the decision making that made him so. The carelessness of John Compton is unforgivable.

I am absolutely sure that few people realized that King erred technically without any awareness on his part, when he was talking about taxes some time ago.

Those who knew the difference would have raised eyebrows when he confused the issue of tax yield and tax collection. But the related course, namely, Public Finance is just but one course in bundle, that you must pass in order to graduate with as an Economics major.

King and the Ali Baba gang that rushed selfish egomaniac Compton to his grave, altogether were a curse on the development of St. Lucia.

The curse is only now partially lifted. We still have one of Compton's many and major legacy goons in the parliament, masquerading on the opposition benches as an 'honorable' member.

Anonymous said...

Kenny should conduct somekind of an enquiry into this for had he not attempt to exposed King this embarassment of his supporter and indeed one of the most vital department of Governtment would not have been. One expect a Governtment Department and in paryicular its head to be truthful and to ensure the information given is credible.St. Catherine has placed himself in an unenviable situation and he should resign his position. This may not have been the first time he inflated figures for the public consumption. Watch it, there is more to come,

Anonymous said...

Like am earlier blogger said, King is in CYA mode. His election bluff budget was bound to be exposed.

Anonymous said...

Micah George, it would have been better if you had given readers the facts in this matter and leave it to us to draw our own conclusions. Can you tell readers whether King ever received St. Catherine's letter, which was addressed, not to King but to Isaac Anthony? Who inserted the wrong growth figures in King's Budget address? King says when St. Catherine first disclosed the growth figures at a budget meeting he was asked whether he was sure about its accuracy. Has St. Catherine disputed this? Did St. Catherine set to deliberately embarass King knowing that in the process he too would have been embarassed? It is not at all unusual for statistics to be adjusted after they are first released. An error was made. For various reasons it was not caught in time. but anyone who has been around economics and statistics understands that these are not precise science. Recently, growth figures for the US, for the first quarter of 2012 were adjusted downwards by as much as 1.2% and this in a country with the most advanced statistics systems in the world. Why do we specialize in destroying our own on such flimsy grounds? St. Catherine has made his mark around the world and his reputation will not be sullied by this. Of that you can be sure.

Anonymous said...

King is a career jackass MP. Just a law clerk that can win votes. That is the long and short of it! As the blogger said, he has absolutely no smarts.

The Director is protected by the constitution under the PSC Act. Neither he nor Kenny can do squat unless through the PSC.

When King had more than his mouth to run back then, he could have moved him to another part of the service. But now? In his dreams!

Now that Kenny has the power, Kenny through the PS Commission can move St. Catherine. Anything else, and any lawyer would happily take the case and win hands down in a court of law.

King can only now do his usual blah, blah, blah like an ah-beer-beer. Idiot.

Anonymous said...

King the election growth rate did not work. Just accept the fact.

Anonymous said...

These Lucians are forgetting that the so called Eastern Caribbean Central Bank, projected 5.4% growth. They were squarely behind St. Catherine's 4%+ growth for St. Lucia.

Explanations must be demanded from Dwight Venner at that Central Bank.
What is his role in all of this. Let us not miss the mark. This is extremely important.

Then there were/are the so-called Finance Consultants working under Stephenson King's wings at his Ministry of Finance. Did they not vet the budget address with the Permanent Secretary, like Jacinta St. Helen, Calixte Leon, Bernard.LaCorbiniere. Were they not the King Administration's consultant economists?
Isaac Anthony is not to be blamed one damn. Where were these so-called consultants appointed by King for four years and more?

What a farce . What a shame. They are all exposed for truly what they are really worth. Don't blame St. Catherine or Isaacc Anthony.

Anonymous said...

I don't know that Isaac Anthony appointed Consultants. These were Stephenson King's appointments. Were they not. Pretending to be what they are not. And they all screwed up, big time. Shame, Shame, Shame.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @ 10:59AM, if you understand anything about the laws governing the PSC, you will know that Kenny cannot force the PSC to hire or fire anybody. The Constitution does not give Kenny or any other PM power over the PSC. The PSC is supposed to operate an an independent body. Kenny is already finding that out with the current PSC. THe only way Kenny can "rule" the PSC is is the PSC allows itself to be ruled by him. As for the consultants, don't forget they all worked for Kenny. In fact, it was Kenny who brought in La Corbiniere as P.S Finance and Planning. And finally as P.S Finance, Isaac Anthony would have been the last official to sign off on the budget address before it reached King. Not the consultants.

Anonymous said...

Jackass government! St. Lucia is idiot country!

Anonymous said...

and so say all of the arse342655
people of this country.

Anonymous said...

And finally as P.S Finance, Isaac Anthony would have been the last official to sign off on the budget address before it reached King. Not the consultants.
+++++++++++++
What major or minor input did that messenger, you call him legal clerk, have in the writing of the budget, again?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous on May 31 @8:24pm it's unfortunate but the truth tends to offend sometimes. I am a supporter of Dr. Lewis but I am also not pleased with how Dr. Raymond and Dr. Long are being treated by my government. The reality is that both gentlemen appear to be the most qualified and yet the least appreciated by my government...someone please help me understand this dynamic.

Anonymous said...

To the previous blogger. If you read my post again you will notice that I said Dr. Ubaldus is an educated man and has the potential to be a real leader. I'm not sure what you meant when you wrote that the truth offends. I like Dr. Ubaldus, I personally just do not like being told at every opportunity how wonderful Dr. Ubaldus is. To me it's become tiring. We know he's educated, accomplished etc. We don't need the constant reminders, particularly when the story did not really have anything to do with him. Feel free to continue posting about Dr. Ubaldus. In the future, I'll just go past the posts without reading them. At the end of the day, they're all still politicians and we know what that means....

Anonymous said...

Blogger above what you are promulgating is conversational bullying. We live in a democracy, although not a true one. As such, we should allow each person a right to freedom of expression. You have that right also.

Like the other Bloggers, I too believe that Dr. Ubaldus and Dr. Long are definitely true assets to this country and it is shameful that the government doesn't seem to recognize that. I am strong supporter of the Labour party, and I intend to support my rep. Alvina Reynolds but like the other Bloggers I will not just sit around and allow my government to make mistakes that are avoidable. We simply should not give the Opposition additional ammunition against us now that this situation is in the public domain.

Anonymous said...

In a more mature society, a more mature individual emerging therefrom would be paying closer attention to the issues related to the technical aspects of the issue at hand: Did St. Catherine err technically, or on the side of caution? Did the accidental prime minister have a single clue about the fundamentals of statistical compilation or the treatment and use of national statistics as GDP?

Like uneducated hordes in a country-bookie nation of idiots, we insist and persist in carrying our representatives on our god damn shoulders like omniscient and infallible gods each and every opportunity we get.

St. Lucia is a very, very sick and backward society.

Anonymous said...

To each his own, as I said regarding the Dr. Ubaldus praise patrol, I will respectfully skip past the posts that keep reminding me of how wonderful he is.

Anonymous said...

Blogger above that is your right. However, it is important that you not impose your opinion on others living in a democracy.

Anonymous said...

Lucian bloggers, what has Dr. Ubaldus got to do with that issue of the wrong growth rate given by St. Catherine? Look at the issues that are important to our country.

By the way, I am told my Ministry officials that these so-called consultants operated in that Ministry with King as Staff members, more than Consultants. And that says a hell of a lot.

Anonymous said...

It is also important to differentiate between someone expressing an opinion, and imposing an opinion on others "living in a democracy"(SMH).

Anonymous said...

Looks like some persons are bent on not only expressing an opinion, which they have a right to but also to impose it on others.

On another note, It is sad that King allowed himself to go down this unfortunate path, and is now looking for scapegoats in the person of St. Catherine.

King is not fit to be anybody's leader. It is so funny watching King and Frederick doing press conferences when he King could not muster the will-power to have one press conference as PM. Shame on you King...come again.

Anonymous said...

It is quite unfortunate to see the manner in which Saint Lucians are expressing themselves in this forum. To my understanding this is a forum which facilitates the discussion of a story featured in the Voice Newspaper, one in which members of the public are afforded an avenue to give their opinion on an issue.

Is this the way St.Lucians want to be perceived by the world? A nation in which persons in expressing themselves have to resort to using derogatory terms to refer to one another?

As a first time user of this facility, I feel utterly disgusted and disappointed by the disposition of my fellow brothers and sisters. And we wonder why statistics present St.Lucians as having one of the lowest I.Q levels in the world.

We can do much better than that. Let us not allow politics to impair our rational thinking. Too much is at stake. Let us not compromise our integrity...self esteem and self worth to score cheap political points by bringing down one another.

At the end of the day we are all Saint Lucians and instead we should promote and encourage one other. If we are not pleased with the actions of our fellow brother or sister let us give some constructive criticism where it is due. One is left to wonder whether the manner in which some of the previous bloggers have aired their views with the use of derogatory terms is the same way they would speak in the presence of their children.

I mentioned earlier that we can give constructive criticism where it is due and in the case of Mr. St.Catherine, I believe that it is due. In order for one to hold such a position 'Head of National Statistics Department' there is a legitimate expectation that the information emanating from such an office would be true and accurate. Although Mr. St.Catherine issued a caveat for the use of the information, I do not believe that this would be sufficient to exempt him from liability. If persons holding leadership positions are allowed to give information that they are uncertain of and simply be given the leverage to say 'this may be not correct' then what are we saying to the nation? It seems to me that we would just be embracing mediocrity and opening the floodgates for people holding leadership positions to send out inaccurate information accompanied with a note 'this may not be accurate'. Come on! This is preposterous and blatantly unacceptable.

One may say that a prudent Prime Minister would have reviewed the information. This may be true but why go through Mr. St.Catherine in the first place if he is not sure of his own research, it seems that the reputation of the Statistics Department would have been saved if the Prime Minister had unilaterally embarked on procuring the information himself by utilizing the proper mechanisms to ensure that the information is true.

If former Prime Minister, Mr.Stephenson King had not criticized Mr.St.Catherine on the impugned information then he would be implying that mediocrity is acceptable in our fair Helen.

Anonymous said...

I mentioned earlier that we can give constructive criticism where it is due and in the case of Mr. St.Catherine, I believe that it is due. In order for one to hold such a position 'Head of National Statistics Department' there is a legitimate expectation that the information emanating from such an office would be true and accurate. Although Mr. St.Catherine issued a caveat for the use of the information, I do not believe that this would be sufficient to exempt him from liability. If persons holding leadership positions are allowed to give information that they are uncertain of and simply be given the leverage to say 'this may be not correct' then what are we saying to the nation? It seems to me that we would just be embracing mediocrity and opening the floodgates for people holding leadership positions to send out inaccurate information accompanied with a note 'this may not be accurate'. Come on! This is preposterous and blatantly unacceptable.
========

Well-written! But it's a lot of hog wash!

The writer is obviously clueless ... clueless about the compilation of GDP statistics! Lord have mercy on our many retards! The island is run over with them!

To be useful, GDP figures should be published every quarter!

Just reporting the annual figure is being like a reporter and not a manager of the economy.

With quarterly figures, you can effect changes to put the country on a better path to growth or recovery. Regarding this, King is just as clueless as the writer.

You all put an ordinary messenger boy from Compton's office to manage millions and even billions of dollars. Therefore, what did you expect to happen? Eh?

King as PM is the head of the department. In our system of government the minister, yes the minister, and not the officer is responsible for errors, misjudgements and failures.

If King today, still cannot understand what the hell that was put in front of him, blame the moronic cabinet members who made him Minister of Finance.

If he knew anything, just about anything about GDP figures, he would have known that they are always provisional.

Even in the great US, with all the experts and expertise available plus computer resources, the numbers are always provisional. They are always revised and downwards too.

King was warned.

If he had had proper schooling, if Compton did not just insult St. Lucians again by putting another of his half-educated broomsticks into office, and if Compton had not been so arrogant and senile to think that he could lead a pack of jailbirds, drug lords, complete morons, and misfits as ministers, King would not have qualified so easily with the bar so darn low, to make it as PM. We would not have this level of dumbness in government.

This writer of this excuse is shamelessly apologetic and a sitweeyezz.

Anonymous said...

@ June 8, 2012 10:56 AM

Yet again the point has been proven... some writers insist that in order for them to bring a point across they must resort to the use of arbitrary insulting language. I guess this may be attributed to the patent belligerent attitude of the writer and a deficit in the persuasive techniques used by the writer.

I have stated my position very cogently all I am saying is that Mr. St.Catherine should not be exempt from liability for his errors. As Head of any department the one who holds such a position should also be held accountable for any mistakes made under his or her leadership.Moreover, he or she should be accountable especially when such mistakes can have extensive implications for the reputation of Saint Lucia. And for holding such a view I make no apologies.

Anonymous said...

@June 8, 2012 12:21 PM:

Because the intent is to be apologetic and to apportion blame on the civil servant, you obviously are trying your hardest to avoid facing the reality of the situation.

How can you blame the compiler of the data, when those who were supposed to give the data did not do so properly, or provided tainted or incorrect data.

In my life's work in consulting, I have pull no punches in laying the blame for deficiencies.

It is NOT an error in methodology.

The data WERE inconsistent with normal sets previously used or handed to the department.

A tentative figure was apparently to be produced. One was.

The end-user of the data was told that it was defective.

What a smart, alert and KNOWLEDEABLE end-user would have done is to make it abundantly clear when using the data, that the figure was PROVISIONAL.

All knowledgeable and really educated people do that and routinely especially with GDP figures.

There are lies, damn lies and statistics!

The educational deficit in the level of scholarship of the PM is to blame. Come on! Face it!

It was NOT a statistical error by any stretch of the imagination!

The entire saga reflects what the computer industry knows well: Garbage in, garbage out!

This goes for data as well as for conveys of the moronic MPs that are voted into and pass through the local parliament every five years!

Your blatant intellectual dishonesty does NOT allow you to go there, or to perceive this much. Does it?

Are you are sufferer of 'selective perception' too?