Response from Observer Radio Host Kieron Murdoch to the statements of Sir Gerald Watt, KCN, QC regarding The Big Issues

60

I respond to Sir Gerald Watt, KCN, QC on the matter of his recent unjust and false characterizations of The Big Issues, a programme which currently airs on Observer Radio on Sundays at 1:00 PM, and of which I, Kieron Murdoch, have been the current producer and host since January 2021. Sir Gerald’s false and unjust assertions about The Big Issues appeared in a written statement dated December 24, which he penned in response to criticisms directed at him by two guests, Dr. Isaac Newton and Mr. Akaash Maharaj, who appeared on The Big Issues on Sunday, December 19.

 

The comments of both guests were on the question of whether it was a conflict of interest or in any way irregular for Sir Gerald, being Speaker of the House of Representatives, to have, as an attorney, represented Member of Parliament (MP) for All Saints West, the Hon. Michael Browne in a recent criminal trial. Both commentators said they thought it was a conflict of interest for the Speaker. Sir Gerald, in his written December 24 statement, explained why in his view, there was no conflict. I was delighted that Sir Gerald chose to respond, but unfortunately, and much to my dismay, Sir Gerald then went on to make a number of false and unjust characterizations of The Big Issues programme in his statement which I earnestly felt necessitated a response in writing.

 

  1. Most unfortunately, Sir Gerald stated that it was the United Progressive Party (UPP) which “runs” The Big Issues and he further called it “their radio programme”. In another instance he stated that The Big Issues does not cater to “independent listeners unaligned to the United Progressive Party”.

 

Response: His statements are false and extremely unfortunate. Let me be clear for Sir

 

Gerald’s sake: Neither the United Progressive Party (UPP), nor the Antigua and Barbuda

 

Labour Party (ABLP) nor the Democratic National Alliance (DNA), nor the Barbuda Peoples Movement (BPM) nor any of their agents or affiliates set the agenda of The Big Issues, determine who appears on The Big Issues, or compose the questions asked on The Big Issues. That is my sole responsibility as the show’s current producer and host. I do from time to time, consult with the members of Observer’s newsroom and the Editor.

 

While I take exception to Sir Gerald’s assertion because it is false, I note that it is not the first time, and shall certainly not be the last time, that those who are upset by targeted and critical comments made on The Big Issues seek to be dismissive of those comments by simply claiming that they were in some way orchestrated by one political party or another. Essentially, their objective is to diminish the credibility of the comments our guests make by labelling the programme as being “run” by one party or the other. This sort of pandering to the political tribalism of Antiguans and Barbudans is something which I consider to be

 

1

 

 

unworthy of Sir Gerald, a leading attorney of high esteem whom I respect and whom I sincerely admire. Whichever political party or boogeyman which Sir Gerald might believe is out to get him has absolutely nothing to do with The Big Issues or its current producer and host.

 

  1. Sir Gerald asserted that there was a “failure for the most part to present quality persons of differing opinions on the programme”.

 

Response: I receive this comment graciously, as I must admit that it is sometimes difficult to find persons to appear on The Big Issues who are both informed and unbiased. Sometimes, we have to compromise on one of these criteria. But I certainly reject the notion that this has been a “failure for the most part”. A lot of effort goes into the production of

 

The Big Issues and great care is taken to get “quality persons” who represent different perspectives and points of view. For example, Sir Gerald’s most esteemed professional colleagues, attorneys Mr. Jarid Hewlett and Dr. David Dorsett, have appeared on The Big Issues this year. So too, have fellow parliamentarians such as the Hon. Samantha Marshall MP, the Hon. Senator Bakesha Francis-James, and the Hon. Senator Alincia Williams-Grant. Fellow senior attorneys, Mr. Anthony Astaphan SC, and former Attorney General, Mr. Justin Simon QC, have appeared on The Big Issues this year.

 

Former Prime Minister of St. Kitts and Nevis, the Hon. Dr. Denzil Douglas MP, appeared this year. Former Ambassador of Jamaica to the UN, Mr. Curtis Ward has appeared this year alongside Antigua and Barbuda’s present UN Ambassador, Dr. W. Aubrey Webson.

 

A dozen highly respected medical professionals in Antigua and Barbuda, and in the Caribbean have repeatedly appeared on The Big Issues this year. We have been joined by expert guests out of Canada, the United States, the UK and Switzerland. Indeed, a plethora of highly trained and highly accomplished professionals and academics in Antigua and Barbuda and beyond have appeared this year. I consider them to be “quality persons of differing opinions” but Sir Gerald is entitled to disagree.

 

It should be noted that locally, one of the greatest obstacles to booking “quality persons of differing opinions” on The Big Issues is the very same political tribalism in Antigua and Barbuda to which Sir Gerald so shamelessly pandered when he characterized the show as being “run” by a political party. Over the years, the number of potential guests who have told our producers that they do not wish to appear on the show primarily because they fear being victimized for speaking critically on issues in Antigua and Barbuda, is staggering. The scale of this problem is enormous and is often underestimated by the listening public. Nevertheless, I am satisfied that quality guests do routinely appear on The Big Issues and that there is a satisfactory variance of views.

 

However, I ought to state that the producers and hosts of The Big Issues have done their best over the years not to condone “intellectual dishonesty” as Sir Gerald put it. In this regard, I do try to steer clear of potential guests whom I know are intellectually dishonest,

 

2

 

 

in that they are highly inclined to offer disingenuous views on the basis of their political or other biases and or agendas. I do not always succeed, but I try.

 

  1. Sir Gerald asserted that on The Big Issues, there was “the disconcerting habit of inviting a panel to deal with issues involving persons readily available to Observer and allowing the panel to beat up on these persons who have no opportunity to rebut and defend their positions.”

 

Response: The idea that a person has no opportunity to defend their position is utterly false. While a person who may find themselves subject to criticism on The Big Issues might not be there at that moment to respond, Observer makes a habit of reaching out to such persons to give them an opportunity to rebut, usually in the news. This has been the routine. Sir Gerald was given such an opportunity when he was contacted not long after the show on the same afternoon of Sunday, December 19, 2021, for comment, after Dr. Newton and Mr. Maharaj were critical of him. When he wrote at the opening of his December 24 statement that “my attention has been drawn to certain statements made on The Big Issues”, it was Observer which first drew his attention to the same statements, voluntarily sent him the audio recordings of the commentators, and gave him an opportunity to respond the very same afternoon. He said then that he would respond in the week, which he did in writing. Before he responded in writing, he did ask if he might be allowed to appear on a subsequent The Big Issues to respond there, but he was informed that it was our policy to handle such responses by putting them in the news. He further declined attempts by Observer to interview him for a response after Sunday, December 19, and chose instead to respond in writing on December 24, with which we had no problem.

 

Sir Gerald used the term “beat up” to describe the manner in which commentators on The Big Issues have dealt with persons who become the subject of our discussions. To be clear,

 

Sir Gerald was not “beat up” on during The Big Issues on December 19, as I would not have allowed a guest to rabidly attack him or his character. Two guests were asked if they thought it was a conflict of interest for him to have been the Hon. Michael Browne’s attorney. They said they thought it was a conflict. They used phrases such as “most inappropriate”, “perhaps even unethical”, “I frowned at that”, “a bizarre choice”, and “a structural conflict of interest”. Where and when was Sir Gerald “beat up” on? Which statement of the two guests crossed the line of fair and reasonable criticism and strayed into unjust persecution of Sir Gerald? Were there personal attacks made? Or Innuendos? Or criticism so unjust that it ought to have been stopped by the host? The panelists spent fewer than three minutes discussing Sir Gerald’s decision to represent the Hon. Michael Browne after discussing Michael Browne’s case for nearly forty minutes. I have not heard any complaints from the Speaker’s client the Hon. Michael Browne.

 

Sir Gerald occupies a public office and so too do many of the individuals whose actions are routinely subject to scrutiny on The Big Issues. It should be expected and welcomed in

 

3

 

 

any progressive and liberal democracy that persons in public office will be subject to the most intense level of public scrutiny, which includes constant, rigorous and critical commentary in the media on their actions and their performance. While as media practitioners, we must at all times try to achieve fairness and balance, we are not here to save anyone from being the subject of criticism altogether. It continues to amaze me, the extent to which persons in public office in the West Indies are almost totally averse to any level of serious debate surrounding their actions and their performance in public office. I often wonder if they could ever survive in a larger, more developed liberal democracy where the level of media scrutiny, public debate, and intense criticism of public officials is so much greater, and yet, is considered totally in order.

 

As to whether a person should be invited to The Big Issues when an issue may be about them, sometimes we find it suitable to bring them on and at other times we find it more suitable not to do so. Let me explain. This is really a consequence of the aim and format of the show. The Big Issues tries to be about analysis. It tries to be a space where after the news of the week, guests are invited to critically assess important issues. Analysis is the ultimate objective. In order to get analysis of an issue, we often actively seek out persons who are not directly involved in the issue itself, but who are competent and unbiased. I can say honestly, that in the politically tribal landscape of Antigua and Barbuda, it is sometimes extremely difficult to get persons who are both competent and unbiased .

 

The fact is, we often prefer persons who are not directly related to an issue to come and give us their analysis of it. If we are talking about the actions of Public Official X for example, then we would not get Public Official X to come and analyse their own actions. Chances are, they might already have spoken publicly about it. For example, we might try and get someone in the same professional field, then someone else who formerly served in the same position, and perhaps finally, a private sector individual affected by decisions from Public Official X to give us their analysis. This is merely an example of how we might go about seeking guests. Public Official X always has the ability to respond to any criticisms made on the show by talking to our newsroom or even appearing on another one of our programmes where the format of the programme is more conducive to their appearance. Admittedly, there are often instances where there has been so little explained publicly about a particular issue under discussion that we do indeed have to get Public Official X themselves on, in order to extract substance for our analysis.

 

  1. Sir Gerald complained that The Big Issues was “critical and unfair” in nature.

 

Response: I do not apologize for the show being “critical” in the sense of being evaluative and commentative. Although, I know that Sir Gerald means “critical” in the sense of being overly harsh and condemnatory. But I reject this assertion. Where our panelists have been harsh and condemnatory, it is most often within the realm of fair commentary on the myriad of serious issues that warrant analysis on the programme. We seek panelists who are not

 

 

4

 

 

intellectually dishonest. Therefore, our panelists often (though not always) call a spade a spade. Often, they do not pussyfoot. That is an objective of the programme and I do not apologize for it. It would be intellectually dishonest for someone not to acknowledge that Antigua and Barbuda is a country that grapples with a number of social, economic and political challenges which rightly ought to be spoken of in a highly “critical” manner, and I do mean critical in both evaluative and condemnatory senses. If Sir Gerald wants to listen to pussyfoot radio commentators who placate and tip-toe, then I must apologize as he will not find such commentary on The Big Issues.

 

  1. Sir Gerald complained that too often the “same old regulars” appear on the show as guests.

 

Response: Again, this is a complaint I receive graciously, as others do from time to time make the same remark. Yet, I must emphasize that the extent to which different new commentators are willing to appear on the programme is limited by their confidence in speaking openly and honestly about issues in Antigua and Barbuda without fear of victimisation and without fear of being labelled as political. Essentially, persons are often afraid that listeners will label them as an ABLP supporter or as a UPP supporter depending on whether they agree or disagree with some action of the government. This is often why we end up getting so many international guests on The Big Issues. A person reading this might remember an instance when they themselves had been asked to appear on the show, but declined, for fear of being labelled and victimized as being partisan. In this vein, I again state that I found it extremely unfortunate that Sir Gerald chose to label The Big Issues a political party “run” programme, simply because the persons who appeared on the show on Sunday, December 19, were critical of him. This paralyzing and stifling culture of political tribalism is poisonous to Antigua and Barbuda. I sincerely implore Sir Gerald to rise above it.

 

  1. Sir Gerald chose to make a number of unfortunate characterizations of some of The Big Issues’ guests. Antiguan political adviser and campaign manager Dr. Isaac

 

Newton was referred to as “fast talking” but “saying nothing”. Canada-based anti-corruption advocate Mr. Akaash Maharaj was labelled as “intellectually dishonest”, whilst Dr. David Hinds, an academic and a political scientist from Guyana, was called

“noisy” and “boring”.

 

Response: Although Sir Gerald says he is “tired” of these voices, The Big Issues is pleased that these three persons have been invested enough in what goes on in Antigua and Barbuda to appear often on the show, and we hold them in as similarly high a regard as we hold Sir Gerald, a most esteemed figure in Antigua and Barbuda. While all three men are capable of defending themselves, I must admit that I took particular exception to Sir Gerald calling Mr. Akaash Maharaj “intellectually dishonest”. Truthfully, Mr. Maharaj is actually one of the most intellectually honest people that you will hear on local radio. His analyses are

 

 

5

 

 

often biting though fair. Mr. Maharaj has uncompromisingly high standards on governance, transparency, and integrity. This seems to upset some people and I honestly do not know why. I can only surmise that those who are upset by someone who advocates for exceedingly high standards of governance and integrity are the sort of people who enjoy mediocrity. I refuse to entertain the notion even for a moment, that Sir Gerald could ever be counted amongst such a crowd, since he is a senior attorney of impeccable character and unparalleled esteem.

 

Here is the truth. You will often hear these persons – Hinds, Newton, Maharaj – as we do book them often, and we usually book them for political discussions. However, any lack of variety in commentators on political and governance issues is due to the truly saddening fact that in Antigua and Barbuda, there is a dearth of political commentators who are (a) informed, (b) unbiased, and most importantly, (c) willing to speak publicly without fear of being labelled and or victimized . I must therefore, for a third time, express my dismay at Sir Gerald having falsely referred to The Big Issues as a programme “run” by a political party, likely intimidating prospective guests in Antigua and Barbuda who do not wish to be labelled as partisan merely for offering a critical opinion on matters locally. This is the sort of behaviour which compels us to repeatedly go outside the country or rely on repeat guests in order to provide analysis on political and governance issues. It is a sad reality, and it reflects poorly on our political culture. Alternatively, we could (and do from time to time) simply get commentators of different political biases on the same panel, but this more often descends into lying, pussyfooting, accusations, rhetoric and cheap talk that is unworthy of The Big Issues. I wish Sir Gerald all the best in the new year.

 

 

Kieron Murdoch

 

[email protected]

 

 

Background to this issue:

 

Sir Gerald Watt, KCN, QC, who is the Speaker of the House of Representatives and a highly respected senior attorney, was the subject of criticism on the December 19, 2021, edition of The Big Issues during a discussion about the political future of Member of Parliament (MP) for All Saints West, the Hon. Michael Browne, after Browne’s recent acquittal in a criminal trial. Sir Gerald, as an attorney, aided in the MP’s defense.

 

At the end of the discussion, the host Mr. Kieron Murdoch asked two of the panelists, Dr. Isaac Newton and Mr. Akaash Maharaj, whether they thought it to be either a conflict of interest or in any way irregular for Sir Gerald, being the Speaker of the House of Representatives, to have been actively part of the All Saints West MP’s defense team. Both men disapproved of the Speaker’s decision and said that they thought it to be a conflict of interest.

 

 

6

 

 

Subsequently, on that very Sunday afternoon, Sir Gerald was sent the audio recordings of the two panelists, then phoned and offered the opportunity to be interviewed and to respond that afternoon to the comments they had made, particularly as the guests’ comments were to be carried as a story in that evening’s 5:30 PM news. Sir Gerald replied then that he was not in a position to respond immediately but would be happy to do so later that week.

 

Days later via text, he discussed that he felt the need to respond on a subsequent The Big Issues show, as opposed to doing so through an interview to be featured in the news. He was informed that it would be simpler for him to respond via an interview for the news, as the format of The Big Issues was such, that carving out time for responses was often troublesome. Therefore, if someone wants to respond to something said on the programme, we had always tended to feature their response in the news. It often gets aired on radio twice and is also carried as an article in print. He was also informed that should he wish to respond via a letter, the editorial team might be pleased to publish it.

 

Sir Gerald did respond in writing, much to our delight. He addressed the issue of whether his being Speaker of the House of Representatives and also having been Mr. Browne’s attorney ought to be seen as a conflict of interest or in any way irregular. His ultimate conclusion was that: “As an attorney-at-law, and a leading Queen’s Counsel, I was entitled to represent the Honourable Michael Browne in any matter, civil or criminal, whether I am the Speaker of the House or not.” He then went on to make some unfortunate characterizations of The Big Issues, to which I have responded in this statement.

 

Sir Gerald’s December 24 statement can be downloaded here:

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jMrk8IyMtpKUtg532C6CNw6WIo-G1Zt-/view?usp=sharing

 

 

Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]

60 COMMENTS

    • A now he sweet, poor Observer the banging post for everyone until they get in trouble, they run to the same Observer they love to hate. I am not sorry for some of them host at Observer them to nuff and edge up. The reason the old fart can speak the way he does about Observer they always pandering to this elitist group on Antigua who don’t give a crap about this country. All they care about is living off the taxpayers. My advice to the host of the Big Issues the problem you are having trying to source guests for your show you looking in the wrong places, try the common man/woman in the society. Stop going after the social barrier climbers.

      • NUFF AND EDGE UP?; …HARSH LIKE HELL: …SOCIAL BARRIER CLIMBERS?

        Seemed that this commenter has no darn empathy for his radio programme hosts/colleagues.

        Describing them as ‘…NUFF AND EDGE UP’ seems ‘…Harsh Like Hell.’

        However, harsh as it might seem, some ‘Merit’ is evident in this comment.

        Like the darn term ‘…Social Barrier Climbers.’

        Oh ho! Trying to break that down?. Betta wash…? NA-A-AH! …Watch yuh darn mout (vernacular).

        Blessed New Year-2022 ‘KSA.’

  2. When elephants fight the small ants get trampled. Advice to little Mr. Murdoch. Learn from your father and do not choose political sides in this field. Cause after Observer where do you think you can work. And you are a very talented young man. Be like the likes of Julian Rogers. When he saw he was being drawn into the pollical landscape of Antigua by the same Observer he moved on. In this industry you have to be very careful not to be branded political like what is happening now. You are young, you are educated. Unlike most of your colleagues there at Observer or even your boss Serpent. You therefore have a much brighter future. Don’t mess it up. You should not even have responded to Sir Gerald in public. But perhaps you got legal advice from mommy who is politically connected. Just look at the law firm she is associated with. That is why I admire your dad who I can count as one of my friends. He was able to stay neutral from any political party and look where he is now. You should avoid even the slightest perception of being politically aligned to one or the other party.

    • In other words, young Murdoch, you better join the ALP persuasion like Daddy or things will not go well for you.
      We are very sick people, FTS. But you are the sickest of all.

    • FROM THE SIDELINE what political side is Kieron Murdoch choosing. He is the producer of the BIG ISSUES and the show as well as the three panellists were attacked by Sir Gerald for simply indicating that there could be a conflict of interest on his part. The producer of the show was well within his rights to have responded. In fact, I would go as far to say that it was incumbent upon him to trd

      • it was incumbent upon him to respond. Personally, there was nothing wrong to mind in the Chambers of Sir Gerald defending Michael Browne. The lawyers with conduct of the case was Dr. Dorsett and Mr. Jared Hewlette. However, where I part ways with Sir Gerald is the fact that he was in court everyday robed as if he was actively involved in the case. Even worse however were his comments after the verdict both outside and inside Parliament. Any comments after the verdict were for Dr. Dorsett or Mr. Hewlette to make. Sir Gerald did not have to be so up front and conspicuous. Perhaps that’s just his personality.

        • BUSINESS-LIKE POINT: …PRESENT ROBED AND COLLARED

          You do have a ‘…Business-Like Point’ as far as ‘Chambers Representation’ is concerned.

          However, ‘…Robed, Collared and Present’ at the trial, were clearly at variance with his ‘…Parliamentary Position” as:

          (a) ‘…Speaker of the House of Representatives; and

          (b) …Representation of a ‘…Parliamentarian’ of that institution on a ‘Serious Criminal Charge.’

          Not saying it is ‘WRONG,’ but some darn ting aint ‘RITE’ (vernacular).

          Blessed ‘…New Year-2022,’ esteemed Counsel.

          • @ RAWSTON POMPEY
            Stop writing like an EDUCATED DUNCE. Let the public know what you are saying. Your writing is atrocious. DAMN IT.

    • That’s why biased and political hacks like you don’t get invited. You’re an intellectual dunce if one is to check. Longwinded pussyfooting political fraud. Pocket over the people deep in the mids or the shenanigans of your leaning tower still a talk bout sidelines lol lol lol. Unfortunately one of the biggest disaisappointment our good land has produced.

    • @From the sideline
      One would like to think that there is freedom of speech in Antigua but reading the comments of labour people like you, apparently there is none. Kieran is right, he can’t get Antiguans to appear on his program because of people like you who would destroy their professional career if they are not perceived to be aligned to the Labour Party. Who gave you the right to say he should not be politically aligned? You would have no problems with his political affiliation if he were perceived to be a Labour Party supporter. Was Antigua willed to the Labour Party? We desperately need a change in Antigua where citizens can express their opinion without fear of persecution and victimization. There will never be change with a labour government.

  4. Wait! This matter is burgeoning to galactic proportions 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 wow! So serious it poses an existential threat to the universe.

  6. There should be a jail cell awaiting the Sir and a spot at the cemetery awaiting the sheet of ply wood that will die of a heart attack soon.

    • Don’t ever forget that there is a spot in the cemetery for ALL of us. In my lifetime I’ve seen the old, middle-aged and young dying. I have also seen the very young dying before the very old. Death is no respecter of man. Trust me, whaever age you are you might just die before Sir Gerald!

  7. Melchesidec
    December 29, 2021 At 8:12 am
    Surely anyone above ground can honestly admit that the Big Issues is on a swift decline and is far from what it once was and has evolved into a useless programe.
    1 It is boring
    2 The content is repetitive.
    3 The host is never prepared with questions.
    5 The host does not research his topics.
    6 Same recycled guests every week.
    7 People from all over the world speaking about issues that are unfamiliar to them except for the clues sent by the host.
    8 The views are one sided.
    9 The affected are never represented.
    10 The hist do not prepare his guest for acceptable listening, (unmute your mic, noise in back ground, etc)
    11 The topics are usually irrelevant and the hist fails to make them interesting and relevant.
    12 THE CAUCASIAN LOOKING AUTHOR IS A HORRIBLE INDIVIDUAL, HE IS SELF SERVING AND POMPOUS. IT IS TIME FOR HIM TO STOOPIMPOSING HIMSELF ON THE PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY. GO AND PUT UP YOUR LEGS JERRY.

  8. Murcdoch can’t be serious. He claims the show is not used to attack put then proves the accusation true by saying persons attacked can only respond via another avenue. He claims other voices have been on but misses that they have not been given equal play like for eg Isaac Newton who a US Court, in 2019, concluded guilty of criminal contempt. Obama and other democrats have been on Fox (not equallly as republicans) but that does not change its purpose and impact. Fact is OMG in our FOX news. Rupert played the same game, influence peddling, the Derricks did. Same game continues in their absence

    • What do you call night soil radio down in the point? You ever hear any voices spouting out information other than their own viewpoint. Come on man!

      • Its interesting that you use that term. Recall when that label was being used for ZDK. What changed? You remember when the Derrciks in writing made clear that the purpose of OMG was to rid the country of labour? Happened right after a fight at Casino Rivera

        • @Tenman: There was a time,when Gaston Browne lived on Observer Radio every Saturday Afternoon. Do you remembered those times Gaston called into SERPENT,in the SNAKE PIT.Then when he won the leadership of the Party from Lester Bird.He banned all of the Labor Party Politicians from going on Observer Radio without his say so. What you have said about OMG does not make any sense at all.

    • The Big Issues is unappealing and uninteresting but on more than one occasion, the PM has barged in on that same program to distort the views of the panelists and to insert himself as who we already know he is.

    • Tenman:Is this the same Newton who won a defamation case against Gaston Browne some time ago.Could that be the reason you and the other Laborites like Fat Boy Sidelines do not like him.

      • Last I heard Newton lost the appeal. I notice your claim that Newton is disliked by labor supporters. Was it not under UPP he was accused of dishonesty and the then admin made clear they wanted nothing to do with him? The court in the US that found him guity of criminal contempt, did so because the judge(s) supported ABLP? Speak to persons who were closed to him and you would hardly find one that has anything good to say of the man. Let me end with a quote from one of his associates:
        ““Newton just told me I shouldn’t have dropped his name into it cos he had passed the project to me and I was doing it as an independent contractor…I went f**ing mad, I said so you drop me under the f**king bus now and ruin my fucking reputation and relationship with XXXXX and then pull yourself out…so I said just get me the money now so I can have it wired to [xxxx] so he is now shitting bricks…” see Developer sues Dr Isaac Newton for so called “fake news”, July 9, 2018, ANR

  9. The Big Issues is unappealing and uninteresting but on more than one occasion, the PM has barged in on that same program to distort the views of the panelists and to insert himself as who we already know he is.

  10. Keiron and many others like to give accolades to people like Gerry Watt and others who are so intelligent. Call a damn spade ♠️ a ♠️. In this world we have seen many elitists who commit white collar crimes even heinous crimes. If Watt wrong say so and stop talking about respect cause he didn’t give you any. Can’t wait for the day to see them all perish before society then what will we say then . 🤔 I am shocked? Give me a break.

  11. People still listen to Obsever?? Other than Darren Matthew-Ward, all the programs are potty sh!t

    Winston Derrick must be rolling over in his grave. Byron Derrick afraid of Serpent and allowed him to run loose and do as he like too much.

    • You I guess you love listening because you know about the programs? How is he doing as he like and you’re offended and the clowns is running the country into a cesspool? You’re not ashamed when you hear the daily struggle’s of the average man? Simple human basic necessities in life like water?

  13. This BIG ISSUES guy is sure touchy. Settle down brother and don’t get too big for your britches. You’re okay, but you ain’t all that, you know. Humble yourself a little.

  15. The BIG ISSUES PROGRAM is totally against ABLP. Guests like ARKASS MAHARAJ who frequent the program is a ABLP hater. He always praising UPP.UPP can do NO wrong for ARKAAS MAHARAJ.BIG KOKER

  16. V. GORMAN I have never missed the BIG ISSUES and I must disagree with your characterization of Akash Marajah as an ALP hater and perhaps supporter of the UPP. Akash Marajah in his contribution on the BIG ISSUES is invariably quite balanced and objective. His comments about corruption in Antigua and the actors of the ALP involved in such corruption cannot be challenged. With respect to the recent buses case involving the UPP three, he was quite objective in his assessment and criticized the UPP government for how the donation of the buses was handled. He was also quite opposed to any public official claiming a donation to a government to be his personal property. Akash Marajah is stridently opposed to corruption in government and we know that in our short political history no other government has been more involved in international corruption scandals than the ALP. I am sure you do not need any examples but I will just mention Space Research, Guns to Colombia and Odebrecht in which our Prime Minister’s name has been called.

  17. @ CHARLES TABOR
    I expect nothing better from you. I know that you’re a strong Supporter of AKASH MAHARAJ.

    On another topic TABOR. I heard your BOSS D.GISEL.ISAAC this morning on the Observer Radio. She chat so much NONSENSE. The one that stood out most She was UNABLE to name a SHADOW CABINET. That tells me that She does NOT have anyone to fill a CABINET POST.I have been preaching that since day one. UPP Candidates are the following.

    Convicted MURDERERS
    BOUNCED cheques writers
    One Of UPP Spokesperson is a convicted child molester.

    Live in Person house and cannot pay the rent.

    Hence the results of 2023 election as follows
    ABLP. 17 SEATS

    UPP. 00 SEAT.

  18. V. GORMAN I have said it before and I will say it again, when you guys raise the issue of the quality of the UPP candidates, if the little young lady MARIA BROWNE can come out of no where and become a Minister of Government, then any of the candidates of the UPP would be eminently qualified to hold a ministerial position. We will soon see if your election prediction of ALP 17 seats is correct.

  19. @ CHARLES TABOR
    Damn right my election 2023 predictions are correct. We have polls to release soon that will shock you. UPP losing in all CONSTITUENCIES .
    Tabor why didn’t you address my description of some of the UPP Candidates.
    DNA will knock out UPP to be.official Opposition.

    • You have to sing for your supper. The things people have to do sell your soul out to the devil? You’re so heartless that you’re so confident that people is going to put they personal issues that they’re having with this government aside and vote them back in? Well I’m giving God thanks that I was only born in Antigua never worked a day in the country. I’m ashamed and I hope that when these people get a chance if ever to vote that they will not forget all the stress the injustice and inhumane and everything that they had to endure at the hands of this now government.

    • V. Gorman
      No matter who runs against the Labour Party, many Antiguans will vote for them. What have your so-called bright people in the Labour government done for the country and the poor people in Antigua except bribe them with a turkey and ham. While the real estate company that is the Labour Party thief all our assets. We know why Maria Browne was put in government and made minister of lands by her husband so he can control Antigua lands.
      Some of the current members of parliament are going to hell in a golden chariot. Just listen to them cussing each other out about who is the biggest thief.
      If Antiguans vote the labour government back in office, they deserve to continue living in their stinking ghettos while the 1% look down on them from their hilltop mansions.

  20. I’m ashamed to say I’m Antiguan they know something is wrong instead of calling it wrong they crown the crap because of party colors. Then turn around and say they love country? The lies COUNTRY should be first because at the end of the day we’re the government we put those CLOWNS in and we should take them out. The country is the laughing stock of the Caribbean. I can’t believe how stupid these comments are putting politicians and political parties ahead of moral just look around and see how the country is going down a cesspool. If the head is sick the whole body is sick. People look around you nothing is been done for the betterment of the country. The politicians getting richer and robbing the poor people. You can’t get pay and have no water while they never missed a payment getting what you can get and you have to pay for water and light and your service is on a schedule while the non paying politicians is always on do the math. The people brain is so fried that the politicians give them ham and turkeys for your vote which you consume in days then you give them your vote that takes them years to get out. People need to look at long term and worry about your grandchildren future because if it’s this BAD now what is going to happen when your grandchildren become of age. That man needs to be removed all of them is doing what they were told enrich themselves and the dunce people who believe in color still eating the crumbs off the table while the others dying. This is so sad and the heartless people thinks it’s about red and blue people it’s about COUNTRY and equal rights and justice. It’s a conflict of interest and people need to go back to the basic because they is no love with those people it’s about personal greed. Antigua people need to rise up and get a revolution going because we don’t have much time. The country is been sold out and the economic power house what a lie is borrowing from everyone so when it’s all said and done back to slavery again. Wake up people it’s so sad it’s like giving people the rights to rape and abuse us that’s what they’re doing and you’re took blind by color to see it. Antigua people is not a reading public and that’s why the politicians get them they like free stuff and they’re giving away their rights and children birthright for scraps. Take a step back and check out all the politicians before and see the difference with them and they family. How the dunce in their family has a better job than your child that finished his schooling? How they family and child on breastfeeding becomes a millionaire? Asked yourself the questions do you have a bank account? Do you have a million dollar? What do you have compared to these people it’s rape and white collar crime at its finest. Wake up when everything is said and done you can’t defend yourself again the person who’s rapping you and your entire family day after day with your body fully clothed and without touching you. Wake up people it’s time for change your children and grandchildren life depends on it. Stand up for ANTIGUA 🇦🇬🇦🇬🇦🇬

    • My gosh you have soo much nothings to say. People vote for the party they beleive is in their best interest. You claim policians raping the country. Problem is currently you seem to have issues telling the difference between consentual sex vs forced. The one happening here leaves smiles on everyone face and a desire for seconds….

  21. What contributions does one have to make to Antigua except for the most part be affiliated with the Labour Party to be knighted? I think Gerald Watts should remember why he quit politics after labour supporters were cussing his mother on Market Street. Was he not a member of the opposition party, the precursor to the UPP that he is apparently maligning. Was he the UPP representative to the Electoral Commission and then turn around and betray the UPP? The rules had to be changed to get rid of him.
    There are people in Antigua who have no principle. They will always be opportunistic and go to the highest bidder. Check the number of former UPP people who are now cuddling up to the Labour Party.

    • The UPP losing supporters to Labour every day. There is a mass exodus. They know Labour is the future. DNA has the makings of being a real opposition party, nonetheless almost every seat will go Labour this time around. UPP will be tossed to the dustbin of history.

      • Labour has been the future for fifty years and What has Antigua achieved after all these years? At one time Antigua was way ahead of St. Kitts and look at St Kitts today? I don’t care if it is UPP or DNA. This firm we have for a government time is up.

        • You must be blind not to see. Lets use 1970 since you said 50 years:
          1. Practically every house in A&B has 2 TV’s when then most had none
          2. Scholarships are easily available to those who quality
          3. Healthcare is much improved. Look at our infant mortality rate then and now. We now have major surgery done here eg kidney transplants.
          4. A&B born persons now head major local corporations
          5. We now have our own University of the West Indies landed Campus
          6. You no longer drive in villages and see mothers sucking lice out of their children head (since you pulled in VC’s time)
          7. A&B though being one of the smallest population wise in the OECS tends to lead in terms of GDP
          8. Local (Indigenous) banks now control our banking sytem
          9. Fibre is now being installed in homes
          10. More and bigger government secodary and primary schools than existed in 1970

          • Ya ramble on. Antigua has a lot of dumb, ignorant people who continue to vote in a greedy, thieving government to office. Oh I almost forgot, it is the non nationals who are brought in to join the dumb and ignorant to vote for them as most of Antiguans don’t want them. If Antiguans wanted them, why would they need non nationals?

    • Watch you chat rubbish. Is Watt’s fault the then government did not provide the resources needed by ABEC? Its Watt’s fault that people like Chaku were encouraging persons at the last minute to go and get replacement cards? You realize the strain that put on abec? Its Watt’s fault a court ruled the changes the UPP made related to him were illegal? Its his fault the picture list passed by the UPP was deemed illegal? Its Watt’s fault the actions of the boundary commision were deemed by a court to be illegal? This is the problem with UPP supporters, you refuse to see when UPP dirty

      • One thing I will say about labour people, they keep their dirty laundry to themselves with no comment no matter how stink.
        Yes it is Watts fault that he disrespected Spencer because he thought he was superior to him. He, I am sure, is enjoying the job he has at the moment, being the overseer of the darkies in parliament.
        Have you ever pointed out the dirty deeds of the Labour Party?

        • Like everybody disrespect BS. A tribunal examined watt’s conduct and found him clean. Jugges on multiple occasions examined BS conduct and found him either motivated by malice or lacking in sence. Clerly he was undeserving of being PM. Even his UPP replacement (HL) is on record as calling him a tissue paper leader

  23. I had a dream. I dreamt that Antigua and Barbuda men and women were able to debate issues and not attack the messenger. I dreamt ABLP and UPP openly criticize their own. I dreamt the PM and Opposition leader stood on a platform together and agree Covid19 protocols. I dreamt political victimisation became history in A&B. Oh shocks. Then I wake up and realised I am still in Antigua and Barbuda in 2022. God help us

  24. These comments are sad, antigua is been raped and robbed by those in high places, while picky head people suffer..
    Why put your wife in charge of Lands and you the finance minister
    Hmmm people that’s the money.
    Come on people think!!
    It’s time for a change.
    Are we as antiguans going to continue to be raped and pillaged by this government…we need a change!!

  25. Just taking a closer look at KIERON MURDOCH. Is this His real / natural head of hair and beard? Just asking !!!!!

Comments are closed.