By NEIL HARTNELL
Tribune Business Editor
nhartnell@tribunemedia.net
The Deputy Prime Minister allegedly twice failed to live up to promises made to environmental activists to halt the controversial Blackbeard’s Cay project, court documents have alleged.
The amended Judicial Review application by environmental group ReEarth, filed with the Supreme Court on February 7, alleges that Philip Davis and other Cabinet ministers failed to follow through in addressing its concerns.
It also paints a picture of indifference by senior public officials towards inquiries seeking information on major investment projects in the Bahamas, again highlighting the need for greater transparency and public disclosure on such issues.
Mr Davis allegedly telephoned Sam Duncombe, ReEarth’s head, on June 19, 2013, after she wrote to him asking why the Blackbeard’s Cay project was approved without a public meeting or Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) being performed.
These omissions, Ms Duncombe alleged, both breached the Planning and Subdivisions Act, prompting an almost-immediate response from Mr Davis in his capacity as minister of works and urban development.
“On June 19, 2013, the Deputy Prime Minister contacted [ReEarth] by telephone in response to the latter dated June 18, 2013,” the court filings alleged.
“In the course of this telephone call, the Deputy Prime Minister told Ms Duncombe that he would ‘call for the file’ and that he was ‘minded to stop’ the development of the facility.
“He stated that the letter of June 18, 2013, had ‘some merit’, and confirmed that he would be conducting a review of the facility [Blackbeard’s Cay].”
ReEarth, though, is alleging that it has heard nothing further from the Deputy Prime Minister on either its June 18, 2013, letter or his “review” of Blackbeard’s Cay.
Mr Davis, though, did respond to ReEarth’s concern that the dolphin import permits might be issued when Michael Braynen, the director of marine resources, was on vacation.
In a June 24, 2013, e-mail to Ms Duncombe, the Deputy Prime Minister said: “Just seeing; I am travelling. Will look into. I am copying Minister as well to intervene!”
The e-mail reply was copied to V Alfred Gray, minister of agriculture and fisheries, but there is no indication of any intervention, as Blackbeard’s Cay ultimately obtained all the dolphin import permits it was seeking.
ReEarth’s efforts to intercede with other Cabinet ministers, including Mr Gray, Kenred Dorsett, minister of the environment, and Obie Wilchcombe, minister of tourism, also proved unsuccessful.
“Mr Wilchcombe agreed to have a meeting with Sam Duncombe, and scheduled a meeting for Wednesday, June 19, at 3pm,” the Judicial Review application alleged.
“Mr Wilchcombe failed to turn up for this meeting, or call to cancel or reschedule, and failed to respond to [ReEarth’s] efforts to reschedule the meeting.”
In Mr Gray’s case, ReEarth alleged he eventually responded to its numerous telephone calls by asking that all its questions be put in writing, to which he ‘promised’ he would answer.
The group submitted 35 questions in relation to Blackbeard’s Cay on July 5, 2013, and claimed “there has been no response” by Mr Gray to the letter.
This followed a June 10, 2013, meeting between Mr Gray, and Ms Duncombe and Sonya Alvino from ReEarth, at which the latter inquired about the dolphin permits.
“Of the 15 minutes allotted to [ReEarth], Mr Gray spent 13 minutes on another telephone conversation,” the Judicial Review application alleged.
“When he came off of the phone, he confirmed to Ms Alvino and Ms Duncombe that approvals for the importation of two dolphins had already been granted and that if [ReEarth] wanted to object, its only option was to speak with the Prime Minister.”
Nor did ReEarth fare any better in its attempts to obtain information on Blackbeard’s Cay and its permits/approvals from top government officials.
It alleged that Michael Major’s ‘tone’ was “irritated, aggressive and defensive” during a conversation that Ms Alvino had with the director of physical planning on June 6, 2013.
The environmental group then claimed it endured a similar experience the same day when it contacted Captain Patrick McNeil, the Port Department’s controller, on the same day.
“He also became irritated and told Ms Alvino that she was ‘not being very caring about [his] workload’ and hung up the phone,” the Judicial Review application alleged.
Tribune Business reported on Friday how Justice Stephen Isaacs granted ReEarth leave to bring Judicial Review proceedings against the Government.
The Supreme Court judge also ordered the four government defendants - Prime Minister Perry Christie; V Alfred Gray, minister of agriculture and fisheries; Michael Braynen, director of fisheries and marine resources; and the Town Planning Committee - to make full disclosure of all permit, licence, lease and approval applications by Blue Illusions, the Blackbeard’s Cay developer, and what they had granted in return.
And Justice Isaacs also ordered that a speedy trial on the merits of the case take place.
The Judicial Review is challenging, and seeking to overturn, the decisions by the Government to grant Blackbeard’s Cay its various permits and approvals, particularly its dolphin import and planning/construction permits.
News of the court action already appears to have travelled far, judging by the e-mails sent to Tribune Business at the weekend.
Martha Watkins Gilkes, of the Antigua & Barbuda Independent Tourism Promotion Corporation, said that allowing another dolphin attraction at Blackbeard’s Cay - the fourth in the Bahamas - could damage this nation’s international reputation and harm Bahamian-owned businesses.
Picking up the argument that Blackbeard’s Cay will suck cruise passenger business away from Bay Street, she wrote: “This could seriously affect local excursion companies due to potential dilution in their businesses from foreign investors/companies having large capital to invest, removing business from locals.”
And Ms Watkins Gilkes added: “With such strong feeling against keeping dolphins and whales in captivity, the image of the Bahamas could be irrevocably damaged due to non-governmental organisations (NGOs) worldwide joining the campaign against captive dolphins, which would be publicised on their websites, to members and via social media.
“I respectfully suggest that it would be more beneficial to promote the excellent opportunities for watching dolphins and whales in their natural habitat, something that is already possible around the islands, and would have a positive effect on tourism rather than promote captivity.”
Comments
Use the comment form below to begin a discussion about this content.
Sign in to comment
Or login with:
OpenID