WATCH: DCA Destroys Pringle’s US$65K Tent at Morris Bay as Political Tensions Boil Over

Political madness! There’s a time where we have to draw the line between fair and unfair. It’s high about time we draw the line between stupidity and wickedness! I will not stand with the government of Antigua and Barbuda on ridiculousness. I hope Mr. Pringle proceeds with legal action on this one. It’s time somebody give Gaston a taste of his own medicine!!!

Pringle was so loud in parliament, they had to find a way to silence him? Anyone who agrees with the Labour Party and DCA should truly be condemned! This is crazy

Yet Gaston Brown and the DCA, allow white foreign investors to fence off the peoples beach and do nothing!!
I would say shame on them, but the ABLP have no shame!!

What happened at Morris Bay was not leadership, and the right-thinking people of this beautiful nation see it as an abuse of authority disguised as enforcement.
We heard what happened in the PARLIAMENT. We listened. We saw. Prime Minister Gaston Browne’s decision to send the DCA, backed by police, to bulldoze Jamale Pringle’s tent while the Opposition Leader was inside Parliament is nothing short of political intimidation. It was a show of force meant to embarrass, silence, and humiliate, not to uphold any so-called regulation.
This is not governance. This is vindictiveness.
The Prime Minister has turned state agencies into weapons, and this very day, he fired them at the parliamentary Opposition while they sat down in the house of assembly. A $65,000 structure was destroyed, not dismantled, not removed destroyed. Come on Gaston Browne, where is the love that you claim to have for people. You preach love on your radio station every Saturday yet you display nothing but hate here. That is not due process. That is spite.
And the worst part? Ordinary citizens are now terrified that their own small stalls and makeshift structures could be next. When political power is used this way, it sends one message to the public: If you dare oppose me, I will come for you too.
Antigua and Barbuda is not a dictatorship. No Prime Minister, Labour, UPP, or otherwise, has the right to use government machinery to retaliate against political rivals.
This is a dangerous precedent.
This is a misuse of state resources.
This is the behaviour of someone who has forgotten that leadership requires restraint, fairness, and respect for democratic space.
Whether you like Pringle or not, what happened should frighten every citizen who believes in democracy. Today it’s the Opposition Leader’s tent. Tomorrow it could be a vendor’s stall, a small business, or any citizen who dares speak out.
Antigua and Barbuda deserves better than a government that treats power like a personal weapon.

I thought them guys were kidding in Palriament. Never know they serious

It’s Not About Politics — It’s About Regulation Legal Framework Requires Planning Permission for New Structures
Under the relevant laws (as incorporated into the revised Physical Planning Act), any new building or structure must receive planning permission from the DCA before construction begins.
FAOLEX
+2
Antigua and Barbuda Laws
+2 The Act classifies a “building or other structure” on land — including the coastal/shoreline zones — as subject to regulation.
FAOLEX
+2
Antigua and Barbuda Laws
+2 That means any erection on a public beach — like the structure allegedly built by Jamale Pringle — must go through formal channels, seek approval, and be assessed under building codes.
Antigua and Barbuda Laws
+2
FAOLEX
+2 Public Beaches Are Protected — Coastal Constructions Are Not Automatically Allowed
The amended definitions under the Physical Planning Act explicitly define what constitutes a “beach,” clarifying the boundaries and protections accorded to coastal zones.
Antigua and Barbuda Laws
+1 Historically, law restrictions also prohibited the removal of sand, gravel or other beach materials for building or construction purposes without a written permit from the appropriate authority.
Antigua and Barbuda Laws These safeguards reflect not only environmental and safety concerns, but also public access rights: public beaches must remain accessible to all citizens — no private development should infringe on that right or institutionalize exclusive coastal structures.
embassy.ag
+2
wicnews.com
+2 Recent Government & DCA Policy Emphasizes Compliance, Transparency and Enforcement
In recent months, the government — via Cabinet decisions — has reiterated that all unauthorized vending facilities and unapproved structures on public beaches must be removed.
antigua.news
+2
embassy.ag
+2 As part of a shift to more rigorous oversight, authorities have announced plans to centralize construction approvals, beef up capacity at the DCA, and clamp down on “shacks on beaches” and other informal/illegal coastal constructions.
Antigua News Room
+1 Furthermore, enforcement notices (demolition/removal notices) are now required to be publicly posted, increasing transparency and ensuring that building infractions are properly documented before action is taken.
Antigua News Room
+2
Antigua Observer Newspaper
+2 Implication: If the Structure Was Erected Without Proper Permit — It Violated the Law, and Its Removal Was Justified
Given the above: if Hon. Pringle’s beach-side structure was erected without a valid permit or approval from the DCA under the rules for coastal development, then it stood in clear violation of the Physical Planning Act and associated building codes. That alone would justify enforcement action, including demolition or removal, under provisions of the Act (as the DCA has done in other similar cases).
Antigua News Room
+2
Antigua and Barbuda Laws
+2 This isn’t about political vendetta — it’s about upholding the law and ensuring that public spaces, especially beaches, remain accessible, safe, properly regulated, and environmentally protected. ✅ Why This Matters: Beyond One Structure Precedent & Fairness: Allowing even one “unapproved structure” on a public beach sets a dangerous precedent: others may follow, leading to piecemeal privatization or degradation of public coastal areas. Environmental & Public-Access Protection: Beaches are fragile ecosystems and key public resources. Regulations exist precisely to prevent harmful development, maintain access for all citizens, and protect natural assets. Legal Clarity & Transparency: With recent amendments to the Physical Planning Act and renewed emphasis on enforcement, the rule of law must be applied consistently — no exceptions for political leaders or influential individuals. Trust in Institutions: If the body tasked with oversight (the DCA) is seen as inconsistent — politically biased or willing to overlook infractions for some but not others — public trust erodes. Consistent, transparent enforcement restores legitimacy. 📣 Conclusion: Questions That Demand Answers Before anything, the DCA and government owe the public clarity on the following: Was a formal permit ever applied for or granted for the structure erected by Jamale Pringle on the beach? If no permit was granted — on what legal grounds was the structure allowed to remain for any period of time? Did the structure violate environmental, coastal-setback, or public-access regulations under the Physical Planning Act or related legislation? Has the DCA acted consistently in similar cases — or does this represent selective enforcement depending on political affiliation or pressure? Until these questions are answered transparently, it’s difficult to view the demolition as anything less than an enforcement of regulation — not a political attack.

The law applies to everyone. Pringle and his gang need to tell people THE TRUTH instead of continuing to exploit their penchant for noise, illegality and pure dunceness. The entitled squatters were warned several weeks ago that their failure to comply with THE LAW would result in their forceable and forceful removal. They ignored the law and are now reaping the consequences. This is a normal quid pro quo. What makes these Barbarians “special”?? Actions have consequences and today, these law-breakers are facing the consequence of their actions.

Are we getting like China, if we speak out on government we are doomed.

So you have big mouth and drama in parliament now you cryng

I see allot of people bashing the government and DCA, let’s talk about the two notices that he received and never acted on them. on that note he said in parliament “send DCA to remove it” and DCA did just that. That could’ve been avoided it he followed the notice orders.

This is just abuse of power and everyone can see it! I’m sure Gaston and Rawdon is at home laughing about this. Not because he spoke about your wife you make this approach!! This is abuse of power and just showing that you run…… Gaston Browne-Trump

WHAT. This is way more dramatic than we believe

$65,000 down the drain and tempers still rising. Politics should never get this personal

So who will pay the man for his tent.