Thompson’s dislike for serious discussion.

Once again Opposition Leader David Thompson is showing his distaste for serious political debate.

Last Sunday night Thompson told party members and supporters at the Glebe Public Market, St George, that the opposition would not be participating in any debate on the Public Service Bill because of the haste with which it was being brought before parliament.

On that ocassion he charged that the draft bill and a companion constitutional amendment had been in circulation less than two weeks which was not enough time for civil society and those not formally in the social partnership to study the document.

However, in response to the claims Minister of Labour and the Civil Service, Rawle Eastmond, pointed out that Government had spent more than six years on the preparation of the new bill as opposed to the ” less than two weeks as charged by the opposition leader”.

Eastmond further pointed out that over time, the workers’ representatives had not only been consulted but permitted to make inputs so that the final bill would be in good shape.

According to the Minister of the Civil Service, around six to seven weeks ago the draft bill was sent back to Cabinet for a final decision as to when it should come before parliament.

However, based on his recent announcement in Canada to party faithfuls there, one can only conclude that Thompson would have been aware of some of the provisions in the new Bill.

Barbadians may recall that Thompson’s proposals on the improvement of the conditions of work for the island’s civil servants were strikinly close to those announced by Prime Minister Owen Arthur on the final day of the BLP’s 69th annual conference.

Is he now running scared of the debating skills of the Prime Minister, Eastmond, Mia Mottley, Kerri Symmonds and Clyde Mascoll?

Last Tuesday he was on familiar territory when he reached into the gutter and hurled insult after insult at Minister of State in the Ministry of Finance, Clyde Mascoll. Mascoll’s defection continues to cause pain and great embarrasment to the top brass of the DLP.

Meanwhile, as the date of his no-confidence motion approaches he has announced that he may be shifting his no-confidence motion from Mascoll.

This shift should not come as a surprise to thinking Barbadians since were he in possession of incriminating evidence against Mascoll he could have mentioned it in parliament where he enjoys immunity from prosecution for defamation.