Williams refutes claims Hilton could’ve been sold in three days

THE impression given by leader of the Barbados Labour Party that the Hilton Barbados could have been sold in three days is off track.

So says Democratic Labour Party candidate for the City of Bridgetown Henderson Williams who was speaking on the platform on Saturday night in Eagle Hall in support of candidate for St. Michael West Michael Carrington.

Williams, who accused the BLP leader of trying to discredit members of the DLP as an tactic to win the Government, gave the example of his salary being placed on a screen in Oistins for all to see. “As though it was a crime to be paid for work.”

He also drew reference to threats that Needhams Point would be picketed because there was an attempt to sell out the Hilton Barbados. “She was supposed to stop this meeting that was supposed to be taking place to sell the Hilton Barbados.” “The meeting was cancelled even before she got up there parading.”

“So the same persons that gave her the information, because of course, what she was talking about is really a shareholders meeting and there are only three shareholders. So one of the shareholders would have obviously leaked the information to her, but that has become the norm in this country.”

“Then she is laying claim to blocking the sale of the Hilton Barbados. If the Government of Barbados was intending [the sale of] the Hilton Barbados in that meeting – what power does Mia Mottley have to stop it?”
“Then she is creating in the minds of regular thinking Barbadians that you can go into a shareholder meeting and in the next three years a country is sold. This is coming from a QC in this country saying this to regular Barbadians.”

Williams said that even a house takes three months to a year for the sale to be fully completed.

“The process to selling an asset like that the first thing is an agreement... in the minds of the shareholders that the property should be sold in the first place. Then when you get the agreement from the shareholders... They are the majority shareholders, but there is a board in place that has responsibility to execute anything in relation to that property, because the board itself has a fiduciary responsibility for the company and directors can be sued in their own right.”

“So the first thing that must happen is that the shareholders must agree that they sell the property. Then the board has to get a resolution from the shareholders with the intention to sell. Under the Companies Act, again the board has the responsibility to ensure the soundness of any transaction in relation to the disposal of an asset. So the Board has to meet, and the board has to be comfortable that the anticipated action is indeed a sound one. If the board determines that the anticipated action is indeed a sound one, then the board has to write to the bank and the bank must have that in writing. You also need to write to the bond holders for permission to sell the asset.”

Williams said that in spite of all of these steps, Mottley is giving the impression that the sale could be completed days before the election. (JH)