Dear Sir,

It is appalling that Walter Roban used his ministerial power to give away a portion of our National Park land for development. What is now a beautiful section of woodland, lush with maturing native and endemic trees and shrubs, and a coastline stabilised by the roots of established Bay Grape trees, is slated to be cleared, enclosed with chain-link fencing to keep us out and fitted with concrete pavers and amenities for the benefit of a commercial entity that has no guarantee of economic viability.

The Grand Atlantic, now the Bermudiana Beach Resort, has cost millions of taxpayer dollars and should prove its worth before taking another single thing from the people of Bermuda. This Ministry of Public Works and Bermuda Housing Corporation collaboration for an events lawn on National Park land is about to set a dangerous precedent in Bermuda.

How sad is it that one individual can single-handedly reverse a decision made and supported, repeatedly over several years, by entire departments of trained civil servants and an advisory body of chosen intellectuals? Protection afforded by the Bermuda Plan and legislated Acts of Parliament are too often overturned by ministerial discretion.

In November 2023, Mr Roban, the Minister of Home Affairs, granted the appeal to hand over National Park land to the Bermudiana Beach Resort for this event lawn, against all recommendations.

Mr Roban was quoted recently as saying, “Like a pebble thrown into the ocean, our actions to address climate change are rippling across the globe and encouraging other countries to do the same. We will continue to do our utmost to protect our environment”. Yet with this decision, he has chosen to destroy a piece of “green lung”, the most valuable tool for mitigating a warming earth.

A high-level government agreement with developers for this land was made more than a decade ago. For good reasons, the plan failed to get support through every process and application along the way ... until now.

The National Parks Commission did not support this plan in October 2014, reaffirmed its unanimous decision not to support the plan in December 2014, and again held firm against it in July 2020. Throughout 2022, the Parks Commission continued to express concern. The commission agreed that the proposal was not in keeping with any of the objectives of the Bermuda National Parks Act 1986. Likewise, the Department of Planning and the Development Applications Board also repeatedly turned down applications and appeals on this matter.

Approving the events lawn on Woodland Reserve and National Park land sets a dangerous precedent of allowing development on an area that should benefit from double protection. To allow development in the vicinity of eroding cliffs in the face of sea-level rise and increased intensity and frequency of storms is simply irresponsible.

In December 2022, the entire National Parks Commission advisory board was dismissed by the Minister of Public Works, Lieutenant-Colonel David Burch, who subsequently stated that the commission “has been acting outside of legislation and in spite of ministry attempts to get them to operate within the law, no progress has been made”.

As a dedicated member of that board, I can attest that at no time did any commissioner act outside their remit or the letter of the law. The board was honourable, effective, intelligent, diverse and had a healthy representation of advocates for the environment, tourism and business. Each of those commissioners deserves an apology for such a misguided accusation by the minister.

The Bermuda Plan 2018 requires consultation with the Parks Commission for developments in National Parks, and applications cannot be approved if the Parks Commission objects. The Parks Commission was not consulted by the Department of Planning for this recent application because it was disbanded before the review of the application.

The usual environmental watchdogs have been monitoring this case and the multitude of environmental infractions, inconsistencies and omissions in applications are well documented. The broader implications of this decision are of the greatest concern. National Park lands in Bermuda are for the enjoyment of all Bermudians, and benefit our unique biodiversity. They hold the core of what makes Bermuda beautiful. With some 3,226 people per square mile, Bermuda has the twelfth-highest population density in the world. It is so important for us to protect and preserve the limited open space that we have.

While the land under threat is rich in local flora but not significant in size, it is the principle of the matter that stands out. How is it possible that land owned by the people and cared for by the people can be stolen away for use by a small elite group that may or may not be interested in even using it? Are we setting the standard now for a path of destruction in the future? It seems, as a country, we are willing to destroy or sacrifice the very amenities that make our island so desirable as a destination.

The consequences of what we do now will be felt by our children and the generations that follow. The abuse of resources and of nature will ultimately cost us all dearly.

This senseless decision does not bode well for our future.

JENNIFER GRAY

Devonshire