“Island Time” Stupidity Killed Grass At Barbados Kensington Oval?

A Hundred Million Dollars For A Few Weeks Of Cricket

Priority: Two Hundred Million Dollars For A Few Weeks Of Cricket... Now What?

Unconfirmed from a reader…

Do you believe that after spending hundreds of millions for Kensington Oval, then to have Cohobblopot, the plastic covers on the grounds were left on the pitch at Kensington for SIX WEEKS? They’re hoping the grass grows back in time for February for a match, good thing we had so much rain in November – oh wait a minute, Kensington was to keep away moisture… Oh well!

32 Comments

Filed under Barbados, Cricket

32 responses to ““Island Time” Stupidity Killed Grass At Barbados Kensington Oval?

  1. HUH???

    hahahaha that would have to be unconfirmed and mostly exaggerated lies. didn’t a tournament play up there just the other day? the one that st catherine’s won the cup for? if the kensington grass is dead and so horrible, the pitch wouldve been unusable for that match.

  2. HUH???

    ok right. back again.

    indeed it was the Caribbean Alliance BCA 1st Division Championships at kensington oval from mid november..

    pics:

    grass looks good to me..

  3. Hants

    You can see the grass at Kensington from the Harbour road going up to Eagle Hall.

    BFP go and “investigate” and then let us know “the truth!”

  4. The Scout

    Usually, what BFP says is exaggerated, this time he is true. Yes, the game between St Catherine and Maple was polayed there but this only made the problem worse. That is why no other games were played at Kensington because they are trying feverishly to get it back upto International standard. In fact reps from the ICC are suppose to be or were in Barbados to inspect the grounds because Barbados was reccommended as the venue for the World 20/20 final either next year or 2010. Prof Edwards was recently asked to assist in getting the grounds back in good condition.
    I knew this would have happened, it happened with the National Stadium grounds and the same would happen to Kensington. I told them so and no-one listened. The quickest way to kill grass is to cover it with plastic but some Big head people knew best so this is the result. Yes, you will see grass when you drive pass but if you go inside and inspect the ground you will see the poor condition it is in. That’s why the Independence Parade returned to the Garrison and not at Kensington as earlier announced.

  5. Fool me once

    200 million spent to fix up 0val no one tak care of the grass? We be the joke of the cricket world.

  6. J

    This is a joke right?

    Farmers use plastic to lay on weeds. This cuts down on the sunshine and kills the weeds without using toxic sprays.

    Will do the same with sporting field grasses, expect that the sports people need live (not dead) grass.

  7. The Scout

    Things like this always happen when youy put square pegs in round holes. I talked about it before and the young lady who is in charge and who from all reports is a professional said that this system works in britain and USA What she didn’t mention is that in those cases the plastic does not stay on for 6 days in hot sun. If you cover anything live with plastic and inadequate air in the sun or even without the sun it will die, even you. it doesn’t take a rocket scentist to know that.

  8. 59

    BFP

    Mia leads the way by calling on the DLP Governmnet to acquire Greame Hall:

    Is it true that Opposition Leader Mia Mottley who is passionate about the environment – has presented a Resolution to the Parliament of Barbados – calling on the Government of Barbados to acquire the Greame Hall Nature Sanctuary for the benefit of all Barbadians and for the patrimony of this country?

    It was BFP, who said that Mia Mottley was the only politician to visit that facility before its closure.

    BFP, I salute you. At last action is being taken.

    *********************

    BFP says,

    What a joke you are. Words are not action, and Mia and her BLP government had almost 2 decades to take action. The only action taken was to implement a plan to build a water park on the Graeme Hall watershed for which a stupid American paid US$2 million in “consulting fees”.

    As far as Graeme Hall goes, without a protector of the environment like Allard the place will soon be condos and golf courses where ordinary Bajans are unlikely to be welcome.

  9. 59

    BFP,

    Are you sure you have your facts right, as regards you immediate above post:

    Here is the truth. I intercepted this on the net:

    PRESS RELEASE

    The Barbados Labour Party Government has been supporting the Graeme Hall Nature Sanctuary from the early planning stages.

    Before we left office in January of this year, the then Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Energy and Environment had been instructed to liaise with the Ministry of Housing to prepare a Cabinet Paper to purchase the GHNS on behalf of the people of Barbados. Elections took place before that process could be completed and we are now calling on the current administration to proceed to negotiate for the purchase of this very important ecosystem, given that it is one of the very few remaining wetlands in Barbados.

    Below are a few of the mechanisms and support measures put in place for Graeme Hall by the BLP Government:

    Ministry of Finance – The Prime Minister’s Portfolio

    • Concessions under the Special

    Development Areas Tax

    • Exemption from Income Tax
    • Exemption from other Taxes
    • Exemption from the charges on the repatriation of interest and capital for 15 years

    Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development

    • Accommodation with the issuance of all import permits for non native Species

    • Provided technical assistance
    • Facilitates “internship” for students of the
    University of the West Indies

    Ministry of Energy and the Environment

    • Technical Assistance during the development phase and continuing during operation

    • Conducted hydrological study on the marine environment of the sanctuary

    • Establishment of a Management Stewardship Committee with GHNS and relevant government stakeholders to address issues relating to Swamp.

    • Included GHNS in the broader Coastal Zone Management Unit Management Plan

    • Identified Graeme Hall Ecosystem in the National Park Plan

    …/3.

    3.
    • Worked assiduously and successfully lobbied with the United Nations to have Graeme Hall designated a RAMSAR SITE.

    • Facilitates requests for licences and permits for plants and animals under CITES. (Convention on the International Trade in Exotic Species)

    • Conducts tracking and surveys of the Green Monkey Population in trees at GHNS

    Monitors Cattle Egret Population in trees at the GHNS so as to determine impact on ecosystem.

    • The Ministry of Energy and the Environment has also paid for:

    • Development of an access to the walk way and channel through the centre of the swamp

    • Removal of sediment trapping mangrove roots so as to allow for channel clearing and the greater movement of water through the swamp

    • Worked with GHNS Science Committee on compilation and assessment of the work done on the ecosystem with particular reference to the aquifer. The CZMU is currently conducting this assessment.

    • Hosted the Annual Minister of Environment Awards 2005 at GHNS, therefore giving strong support to the facility and inviting a number of first time visitors to enjoy the Sanctuary.

    • Repeat visits by Minister of Environment to support several functions at the sanctuary. Several visits also made by Senior Minister Dame Billie Miler and Minister of Health Hon. Dr. Jerome Walcott and other members of Cabinet.

    4.

    Activities scheduled for Government’s financial year ending 2008.

    • Conduct of intensive hydrology study by Coastal Zone Management Unit, National Heritage Department, Barbados Water Authority and Drainage Unit

    • Ministry of Energy and the Environment’s launch of a mobile exhibition as part of the “Decade of Celebration of the Reef” which is to include an exhibit from GHNS.

    This is a random sample of some of the support given to GHNS.

    In addition when the then GOB learnt of the proposed sale the former Minister of Energy and Environment writing on behalf of the Government to the owner’s attorney indicated in writing that the Government was “strongly supportive of the operation of this facility and will monitor this issue of the sale”….. and “will watch closely and take all necessary steps to protect the interest and welfare of the Barbadian public in this matter.”

  10. Hants

    BFP and Anonymous.

    Can you provide a link to this BLP press release?

    If what Anonymous wrote is true, it seems that the previous government provide substantial financial concessions and support for Graeme Hall Nature Sanctuary.

    Why have we not heard this until now?

  11. Nostradamus

    @ 59 & Anonymous

    So if Mia and the BLP are so passionate about the environment and Graeme Hall why was:

    1)The sluice gate that is vital for the management of the flow of water out and into (seawater) the swamp allowed to remain non-operational for 3 years by Mia and the BLP?
    2)An application for construction of a water park entertained on the government owned upland agricultural lands by Mia and the BLP even though government technocrats in the relevant Ministries were against it?
    3)Did Mia or any other BLP politician take any action in response to the letter of Dec 15 07 sent to them by Friends of Graeme Hall alerting them to the pending land use classification change in the 2003 Physical Development Plan? A change that would signal the go ahead for urban development that would be detrimental to the said same swamp they say they now love? Did Mia or any other BLP politician speak in Parliament when the PDP resolution was being debated and express any concerns? See link below:

    Click to access letter_parliamentarian_website.pdf

    4)Did Mia ever visit Graeme Hall Nature Sanctuary prior to the open day?
    5)Has former Prime Minister Arthur ever visited Graeme Hall Nature Sanctuary?

    Where were Mia and the BLP’s voice and passion about the Graeme Hall environment during this period?

  12. ru4real

    They weren’t closing it down that’s for sure.

  13. Cliverton Not Signed In

    ru4real, you should get real.

    The BLP government abused and ignored the owner of the nature sanctuary for years. Both the BLP and DLP talk a great game but actually accomplish very little… and that is especially the case with the Graeme Hall Nature Sanctuary and National Park.

    In fact, all you did was negative -especially when you modified the plan to include development corridors next to the sanctuary.

    You acted like little dictators in everything you did – ignoring or changing the Constitution and other laws at your will – but you accomplished nothing.

    After 14 years of BLP and 1 year of DLP abuse and undermining the nature sanctuary owner said “OK, I give up trying to save this for ordinary Bajans and for the future. Build your f’ing condos and golf courses.”

    Now you BLP and DLP slimeballs want to have it both ways – be seen as being “concerned” about the environment while you sell off pieces of our natural heritage.

    Your only problem is you no longer control the flow of news and opinions – and you are being seen for what you are.

  14. Hants

    BFP and 59 I still would like the link to the BLP press release shown above.

    It is important to know if there is any truth to the release as a clearly shows that the BLP Government provided concessions and assistance to Graeme Hall Nature Sanctuary.

    59 wrote
    “• The Ministry of Energy and the Environment has also paid for:

    • Development of an access to the walk way and channel through the centre of the swamp

    • Removal of sediment trapping mangrove roots so as to allow for channel clearing and the greater movement of water through the swamp”

    It would be helpful if we heard the whole story.

  15. Nostradamus

    @Hants

    I searched the net and cannot find it or “intercept” it as 59 so aptly put it. I am not questioning the veracity of what 59 “intercepted” just that perhaps it is/was not a press release or posted anywhere on the WWW. If it was, 59 would have posted the link and still can do so.

    I am still waiting on 59 to answer my 5 questions above.

  16. Optimist Prime

    Guys! Guts! forget the link!

    Hants, just read page 36 and 37 of the BLP’s 2008 Manifesto as regards “The Green Economy”

    Here goes:

    “Barbados faces an exciting challenge in building a Green Economy. This is an absolute necessity and a valuable legacy for future generations of Barbadians.

    This means protecting our environment, strengthening our physical infrastructure and transforming our economy from one fuelled by oil to one based on the sustantial use of renewable energy.

    In order to build a green economy we will put in place a number of innovative policies:

    We Will

    * …….Purchase the Graeme Hall Nature Sanctuary to ensure that it remains part of national patrimony and implement programmes for its better care and protection.”

    Here is something else!

    Whose idea was it to expand the Sixth-Form to St. Michaels and the Foundation School? The idea is no where to be found in the DLP’s manifesto.

    For the answer, look at the bottom of page 18 of the Barbados Labour Party’s 2008 Manifesto. Now Hants, doesn’t stealing ideas without crediting the source – a copyright infringement and therefore at varience with “integrity?”

    You see why people have a problem with the DLP?

    Now look at Housing:

    Michael Lashly – the so-called DLP bright spark – is doing a poor job trying desperately to implement “good BLP policy.” Apart from Bush Park, everthing else seems like a continuation of sound BLP policy to me.

    Yet, the DLP gives the impression that it is their programme, when those provisions cannot be found anywhere in their manifesto.

    Again, Hants, a copyright infringement, which is at varience with “integrity” and “good governance.”

  17. Nostradamus

    @Optimist Prime

    So the BLP Plan was to buy it and among other things “………..implement programmes for its better care and protection.”

    What programmes you were going to implement? Fix the sluice gate? Reverse the upland land classification brought into force by the 2003 PDP?

    What part of it were you going to give better care and protection to? Maybe you mean the eastern half of the wetland owned by government that receives zero care and management? You were going to bring that same level of care and protection to GHNS?

  18. Optimist Prime

    @ Nostradamus

    Why don’t you just read pages 36-38 of the BLP 2008 manifesto. You mentioned Programme? Then read pages 77-85 of the same National Strategic Plan 2006-2025, which the DLP refused to support and still does not recognise.

    Unless you are trying to be difficult. There it was for the world to see -that the BLP was going to purchase the GHNS.

    I cannot see how the DLP could come-up with any ideas, which are in the national interest – that are not already documented by the BLP.

    In circumstance where the DLP has not introduced an alternative social and economic strategy for Barbados – means that the DLP is struggling badly, to implement good BLP policies.

    This is unfortunate!!

  19. Nostradamus

    @Optimist Prime

    The BLP was going to purchase the GHNS. So what? Again I ask,
    what programmes you were going to implement? Fix the sluice gate? Reverse the upland land classification brought into force by the 2003 PDP?

    What part of it were you going to give better care and protection to? Maybe you mean the eastern half of the wetland owned by government that receives zero care and management? You were going to bring that same level of care and protection to GHNS?

    As requested I just rread pages 77-85 of the National Strategic Plan 2006-2025. I was particularly interested in page 79 under Targets 4.8 “Substantial increase in the area of land allocated to , and managed as, green spaces”.

    Far from increasing green spaces the BLP substantially reduced the approximately 150 acres of green space at Graeme Hall by changing its classification in the PDP 2003 from an open and recreational space to residential and urban.

  20. Optimist Prime

    @ Nostradamus,

    The Government change, all eyes are now on the DLP. By the way, do you not find it strange that no one from the GHNS has refuted what was said to have been done by the former BLP government – as regards the GHNS?

    The big question is, now that Miss Mottley has tabled a Resolution, calling on the GOB to purchase the GHNS – consistent with the BLP’s 2008 Manifesto – what will the DLP do?

  21. Nostradamus

    @Optimist Prime

    Why don’t you answer the questions I asked instead of talking about manifestos, strategic plans and resolutions? That is what the BLP & DLP are good at, a lot of wordy bullshit and “visioning” but when it comes down to action “nada”.

    So Mia tabled a resolution. Big deal. Imagine that according to a press report (Nation Dec 22 page 25) the first time she visited GHNS was a FREE open day a couple weeks ago. She should have been ashamed to have admitted that. And now she is going to be the savior?

    When the then government was facilitating the water park developer what did Mia and the BLP do?

    What was Mia’s contribution to the PDP 2003 resolution in Dec 2007 that changed the land classification of the lands above GHNS so that they could be developed by the likes of water park developers etc.?

    Why doesn’t she bring a resolution to parliament to change that classification back to open and recreational as it was in the previous PDP?

    Why doesn’t she bring a resolution to Parliament to protect the upland buffer lands in perpetuity?

    Why doesn’t she bring a resolution to Parliament to fix the sluice gate that has not operated for 3 years under her previous BLP administration?

    Those would be meaningful resolutions that would indicate sincere environmental concerns not some resolution for government to buy GHNS. Can you imagine that world class operation and facility owned and run by government? You think the public are stupid?

  22. Optimist Prime

    @ Nostradamus

    ‘Protect Graeme Hall Swamp’

    Date December 19, 2007
    Brief ‘Protect Graeme Hall Swamp’

    THE GRAEME HALL SWAMP needs to be properly maintained to protect the biological species and flora and fauna that live in the Christ Church wetland.

    Christ Church West Member of Parliament, Dr William Duguid, speaking during debate on a resolution to approve the Barbados Physical Development Plan (as Amended) 2003, said that the area was not only woods and shubbery, but a water course.

    “In that area we need a feeder facility which would be able to feed water into the swamp to maintain water levels,” he said yesterday.

    “My only concern with how the national park, or the Ramsar area as it is now designated, does not as I can now see it include the feeder area which may be necessary to keep the Graeme Hall Swamp at its appropriate levels,” he added.

    The Government backbencher told the Lower Chamber that his suggestion should be looked into by the relevant authorities because when the water levels decreased the tree roots were exposed and the mangroves and the fish within it were at risk.

    Duguid also lamented the length of time it took to get the Physical Development Plan to Parliament in light of the disclosure by the Prime Minister that the plan should be done every five years.

    Duguid said: “I would hope that in the future we would see a Physical Development Plan coming to this House with greater frequency.” (DS)

    The above is attributed to the Nation newspaper, December 19, 2007.

  23. Optimist Prime

    @ Nostradamus

    Why doesn’t she bring a resolution to parliament to change that classification back to open and recreational as it was in the previous PDP?

    Why doesn’t she bring a resolution to Parliament to protect the upland buffer lands in perpetuity?
    ——————————————–

    There is a process by which the Physical Development Plan would have to be amended involving the establishment of an inquiry and a process instigated under the Inquiries Act.

    Still, in the national interest, your questions are sound.

    ***********************

    BFP says,

    Gawd you are slick and slippery OP. Your BLP shucked the Nature Sanctuary for over a decade, approved a water park until you got caught in the spotlight lying about the secret meeting between the developer and Arthur and then amended the plan to build houses on the watershed.

    You and your BLP are so full of crap with this “we always protected the Nature Sanctuary” lie.

    Slick though. Very slick and slippery. No one can take that away from the BLP machine.

  24. Nostradamus

    @Optimist Prime

    That uninformed drivel from Dr. Duguid is what you post in response?

    Duguid says “because when the water levels decreased the tree roots were exposed and the mangroves and the fish within it were at risk.”

    Let Dr. Duguid know that the reason this happens is not because as he says some kind of “feeder facility” is needed, whatever that is. The low water level and dead fish are due to the fact his BLP government allowed the sluice gate to remain non functional for 3 years. As a consequence when the sand is removed by the drainage unit using a backhoe the water is allowed to flow out for days and the water levels reach dangerously low levels with dire consequences for all life in the swamp.

    Remember the reports in the press a couple months ago when there was high rainfall, water levels were high in the swamp, and too much water was allowed to flow out? Dead fish everywhere.

    This has been going on for 3 years. That is the issue that Dr. Duguid and his government should have addressed. Can you believe that he is a member of Parliament for a Christ Church constituency yet is so poorly informed about a matter like this?

    By the way, did Dr. Duguid have anything to say about the Graeme Hall change in land use classification when the PDP 2003 resolution was debated in Parliament? Or was that report his contribution?

  25. Optimist Prime

    Date December 19, 2007
    Brief DOUSED

    THERE WILL BE NO water park in Graeme Hall, Christ Church.

    Government’s decision was revealed yesterday by Prime Minister Owen Arthur in the House of Assembly.

    “The Town Planning application for a water park in that area was not approved and, in any event, the land on which that water park was proposed to be developed is land owned by Government that the Government has no intention whatsoever of selling.

    “And I hope that this definitively puts the matter to rest. The water park proposal was not approved,” Arthur said emphatically.

    The Prime Minister was speaking during debate on a resolution to approve the Barbados Physical Plan (as Amended) 2003 which would in essence be a policy guide for future developments in the country.

    A private developer had proposed the establishment of a US$22 million water park as a local and tourist attraction in an area well known for its wetlands and bird sanctuary.

    The area was designated as one of “ecological sensitivity”, the Prime Minister said.

    “In the Graeme Hall area we are under commitment to so manage it, to treat it as a natural heritage conservation area and do whatever is necessary to conserve and enhance the environmental quality and visual integrity of the sites that are of ecological significance; and also to ensure that if any new development takes place, it is compatible with the natural heritage and landscape qualities of the area,” Arthur said.

    He said, however, the area would not be designated a national park, as some residents had requested.

    “If it is to be a national park it cannot be done so merely by a petition by persons requesting the minister to do so. There is a process by which the Physical Development Plan would have to be amended involving the establishment of an inquiry and a process instigated under the Inquiries Act and that process has not been [contemplated],” explained Arthur.

    Application

    Three years ago an application was submitted to the Town and Country Planning Department by Caribbean Splash Inc. to construct the park on 17 acres of land, bound to the north and east by the ABC Highway and on the south by buildings of the Ministry of Agriculture and on the west by other vacant lands leased to the ministry.

    In 2005 there was heated opposition to American developer Matthew Kerin’s project that he said would employ 125 people and boost revenues from tourism.

    The park would have had several rides and activities like slides, pools, picnic area, food court, retail area, administrative offices, five acres of parking, storage, wash/changing rooms and service and mechanical facilities. Its holding capacity was estimated to be about 3 630 people and more on peak days. (DS)

    “Attributed to the Nation newspaper as dated.”

    ************************

    BFP says,

    What about the two million dollars in “consulting fees” that the developer paid? What about his meeting with Owen Arthur?

    What about the BLP’s years of neglect? What about the BLP’s changing of the development plan to allow commercial and residential building on the Graeme Hall watershed.

    This article was a joke by the same newspaper that also quoted Owen Arthur as favouring Integrity Legislation! Ha ha ha!!!!

  26. Optimist Prime

    @ BFP & “Nostradamus,

    The Town Planning application for a water park in that area was not approve and, in any event, the land on which that water park was proposed to be developed is land owned by Government that the Government has no intention whatsoever of selling.

    “And I hope that this definitively puts the matter to rest. The water park proposal was not approved” – The BLP’s position as outlined by the then PM.

    The DLP is now the Government, a Resolution has been tabled. The Estimates will be debated in three months, we will see what we will see.

    What will the DLP do about the GHNS, especially since it walked out of Parliament last year and never debated the PDP?

    By the way, do you not find it strange that no one at the GHNS is critical of the former government’s involvement, jut you and BFP?

  27. Nostradamus

    @ Optimus Prime

    “The land on which that water park was proposed to be developed is land owned by Government that the Government has no intention whatsoever of selling.”

    That really is an alarming admission by the former PM. The water park developer was allowed to spend millions on consultants, EIA etc but government had no “no intention whatsoever of selling”. The poor gentleman was led down the proverbial “garden path”.

    Why was the application ever entertained? Where did the developer ever get the idea that he could make an application to Town Planning to build his water park on government owned land?

    Why didn’t the Prime Minister and Minister responsible for Town Planning inform the developer that the land was not for sale so he absolutely had no chance of building his water park at that location because “Government has no intention whatsoever of selling”?

    “In the Graeme Hall area we are under commitment to so manage it, to treat it as a natural heritage conservation area and do whatever is necessary to conserve and enhance the environmental quality and visual integrity of the sites that are of ecological significance; and also to ensure that if any new development takes place, it is compatible with the natural heritage and landscape qualities of the area,” Arthur said.

    If the former PM recognized the above and that the area was designated as one of “ecological sensitivity” why was the developer not informed? Had that been done he would not have wasted the time, money and effort he put into the application.

    If the comments of the former PM as reported in the press are to be believed then the developer really was intentionally misled and deserves our sympathy. He was taken for a ride.

    Sadly so were the citizens of this country. Citizens had to mobilise, have meetings, write letters to the press, and organize petitions when all along no less a person than the former PM was smug in the knowledge that the application had no chance of success because “Government has no intention whatsoever of selling”.

    So why not come out and say so long ago? Why did the PM wait until December 2007, weeks before the election, to say “Government has no intention whatsoever of selling” and “definitively put the matter to rest”?

    ***********************************

    BFP says,

    Nostradamus, you will LOVE this fact…

    Arthur was accurate when he said that the government had no intention of selling the land to the water park developer.

    The deal was to LEASE the land!!!!

    You have to love Arthur and the BLP for their ability to tell a lie through accurate statements. Gawd, they were slick!

  28. Optimist Prime

    @ Nostradamus,

    Arthur added that this position was being reinforced by the requirement that “Barbados must now incorporate the use of a reliance upon environmental impact assessments in every instance where major maritime and other developments are taking place”.

    He also told the House that the Chief Town Planner “will have to follow the policy with respect to the maritime environment very, very closely”.

    – The above is attributed to the Nation newspaper of December 19, 2007.

    Sir/Madam,

    All the DLP has to do is make the amendment to the PDP, fix the gate and acquire the GHNS as a new years gift to Barbadians. I am sure that bloggers will not object, neither would the BWU and definately not the BLP, which intends to purchase the facility (GHNS) for future generation of Barbadians.

    There is no divide on this issue!

    Let us move on to a Green Economic Stimulus Package; ITAL, Declaration of Assets; Effective Management of the Economy and those 2000 houses, which the DLP promised to build this year. It now has 7 days to build them.

    Thank you!

  29. Nostradamus

    @ BFP

    “The deal was to LEASE the land!!!!”

    I know that, but I wanted to hear the response form Optimus Prime. I do not think the former PM would mislead especially in Parliament so he must have meant lease or sell.

    Optimus Prime made a great song and a dance by quoting the PM statement that the “land on which that water park was proposed to be developed is land owned by Government that the Government has no intention whatsoever of selling.”

    So let’s ask Optimus Prime again:

    Why was the application ever entertained? Where did the developer ever get the idea that he could make an application to Town Planning to build his water park on government owned land?

    Why didn’t the Prime Minister and Minister responsible for Town Planning or government officials inform the developer that the land was not for sale or lease so he absolutely had no chance of building his water park at that location because “Government has no intention whatsoever of selling”?

    Was this vital information kept from the developer? Was he misled?

    If the developer knew that Government has no intention whatsoever of selling or leasing he would have been a fool to proceed. However he did proceed to spend a lot of money on consultants etc. WHY? Optimus Prime please enlighten us.

  30. GHNS

    GHNS had in fact objected strongly to the former government’s involvement in the Water Park scandal for a number of reasons beyond the obvious detrimental effects the project would have on the RAMSAR site.

    At the time Kerins made the application, and Town and Country had accepted the application, the current Physical Development Plan and its “urban corridor” designation along the ABC Highway was still in DRAFT form and had not been approved by Parliament. GHNS could not understand how an application for a development could be accepted until the land use designation was ratified by Parliament.

    Second, GHNS still does not agree with the fact that the upland lands from the RAMSAR site are designated as residential with an “urban corridor. However, on a procedural level, it makes sense that the current government had to “get the PDP legal” even if it had some flaws. It s

    What remains to be seen is whether the current government will move ahead to change the current land use designation at Graeme Hall so that it can be preserved as a 240 acre park in its entirety.

  31. Barbados the Beautiful

    Before we believe anything BLP says we need to get out the truth on this:

    Ramsar was good idea but was never heard about again after them getting the money from IADB, paying it out to friends, then doing not one more thing. BLP should be ashamed now they saying they always did best for Graeme Hall Swamp. It was owner of Sanctuary that always made things look good from his own pocket and all he got was a drunken tirade and badmouting from Owen Arthur.

    BLP try to whitewash theyselves not working. Sit down shut up and let DLP fix up things.

  32. Optimist Prime

    @ Barbados the Beautiful,

    The DLP should really “fix-up things. They should first start with those 90 & 100 day promises; the Rent Control Act; then a Stimulus Package that involves more than erecting fenses at schools and buying equipment for the QEH.

    Let us make it a lot easier:

    The DLP should ensure that Ministers do work for the taxpayers money. It should give public workers the better accommodation they were promised in January and also give police; teacher and nurses – the duty free cars and increase pay they were promised.

    DLP must urgently stop telling lies:

    If the DLP was serious about ITAL & “good governance” – it would have fired Lowe and Todd as well as the person who set the bad example ,by saying that former BLP operative have million stashed in foreign bank accounts.

    Perhaps at bank not known to anyone and in countries not yet discovered.