For weeks we've been reporting on the major beff between Music Ambassador Shyne Barrow and NIC President Sapnah Budhrani. And while those are the foreground figures, in the background is the Deputy Prime Minister Patrick Faber - who appointed Budhrani - without Cabinet approval - and Prime Minister Dean Barrow, who is Shyne's father.
On Friday after the house meeting - the PM seemed to have a little rap on the knuckles for both Shyne and Faber. He said Faber was wrong to have appointed a NICH President without first coming to Cabinet, while he added no one should publicly attack the Deputy PM - which we clearly took as a note to Shyne.
Today, at a donation - we put that to Shyne - and he rejected it completely. But, we stick by our interpretation and for context, here again is what the Prime Minister said when we asked him about the beef between Shyne and Sapnah:
Reporter
"There are tensions on a professional level between the music ambassador, your son and the president of NICH."
Rt. Dean Barrow, Prime Minister
"They are both adults and I would hope that any such tension might be resolved between them. I will say that the Deputy Prime Minister is the Deputy Prime Minister and ought not to be disrespected in public by anybody."
Reporter
"Your father after the House meeting said basically like a slight scolding that he would advise not to disrespect the minister publicly. Will you modify?"
Shyne Barrow
"That is absolutely untrue. The Prime Minister did not say anything about his son, except that I am an adult and Budhrani is an adult. So don't speak for the prime minister. You are speculating."
Reporter
"Paraphrase…"
Shyne Barrow
"Did he say Shyne Barrow? Did he say my son Shyne Barrow? No. So please sir, don't..."
Reporter
"I am asking will you modify your statement as it relates to your deputy prime minister."
Shyne Barrow
"There is no statement to modify. We have an issue and my issue is with Budhrani. I made that quite clear. All of the positions that I took were centered on Budhrani. Whether or not the minister of culture feels the need to defend someone that he appointed is a matter for him. But my issue directly, squarely was with her. Now she is taking her orders from him and if she is executing on his behalf and he is abreast as to the communications which I've CC him on all of the communications and I complain vociferously before it became a public matter. Now if he is the one that is telling her to proceed and disregard and dismiss me, that is something that we will have to take up internally and try to resolve."
Email
Print