SDO critics lament ‘sad day for Bermuda’
The One Bermuda Alliance has been quick to condemn home affairs minister Walter Roban’s decision to approve a special development order for the Fairmont Southampton hotel, calling the project “staggeringly flawed”.
One environmental group expressed dismay at the ruling, describing it as “a sad day for Bermuda”.
Interim OBA leader Jarion Richardson and Craig Cannonier, the Shadow Minister of Tourism, both issued statements accusing the Government of putting its own interests — and the interests of “big business” — before the welfare of residents.
Claiming that the Government could not be trusted, Mr Richardson said: “Its own interests supersede that of Bermuda and Bermudians.
“This government’s weak negotiations and negotiators have enabled a poorly funded investment to consume the island’s flagship property, impoverish the hotel employees and overdevelop our environment.
“They keep giving away more and more. Now we will have a concrete Southampton skyline, an infrastructure disaster waiting to happen and $75 million in tax concessions.
“To date, Bermuda has entirely surrendered — because this government’s economic policies made us weak and desperate.
“Never mind the fox getting into the chicken coop — now we’re letting the fox design it as well.“
Mr Richardson pointed out that the Government passed laws two years ago that would enable it to approve an SDO without going it being debated in Parliament.
At the time, Mr Roban defended the legislation, claiming: “This is not in the context of any anticipated development.”
Today, Mr Richardson said: “By removing the requirement for a special development order to go before Parliament before approval, this government has deliberately reduced transparency and governance.
“By the time, the people’s elected representatives will have the chance to opine on the project, the deal will be so advanced that to go back on it will get the Government sued. And the taxpayer will have to pay that bill.”
Mr Richardson also questioned why Mr Roban rejected the advice of the Government’s own planning experts, who had recommended unequivocally that the SDO be turned down. Previously, Mr Roban had described government planners as “the most experienced team on the island in this area”.
Mr Richardson said: “This government has now shown its complete inability to listen, both to the public and its own experts. This government has demonstrated time and again, it simply cannot be trusted.
“At this point, the Government and its supporters have let Bermuda know, there is nothing they won’t do to pursue their own interests.
“And Bermudians will be left holding the bag for yet another poorly conceived, poorly executed pipe dream.”
Mr Cannonier echoed the remarks, saying that “the Progressive Labour Party government has demonstrated that they will do exactly what they want”.
“This decision is utterly ridiculous and a slap in the face to the people of Bermuda, especially the residents in the area who have loudly and vigorously expressed their objection to this project proposal.
“Why did it take this long for a minister to respond when all and sundry knew the outcome of the decision?
“This is not a government that listens but one that ignores the cry of professionals, experts and the community. It’s clear that big business under this government rules.”
Karen Border, the executive director of the Bermuda National Trust, raised similar concerns, claiming that the Government had failed to prove that the project was in the national interest.
She also accused Mr Roban of playing down the negative impact of the development.
Ms Border said: “The approval of the special development order for the Fairmont Southampton development is a sad day for Bermuda.
“If we are to give up our precious open space for such a development, it is crucial that the minister can demonstrate unequivocally that it is in the national interest. The Bermuda National Trust believes that he has failed to do so, and we are not alone.”
Ms Border pointed out that the Government’s own technical officers had described the project as “unsustainable”.
She said: “Why does the minister think he knows better? On what basis has he dismissed the recommendation of so many expert advisers? He has failed to share anything concrete to support his position.”
Referring to a number of conditions that the developers must comply with to soften the negative effects of the project, Ms Border said: “Those conditions are nothing but window dressing.
“To illustrate the absurdity of the conditions, you need only look at the ridiculous proposal to put up ten additional bluebird boxes. If you build over the very grassland habitat that bluebirds need to sustain themselves and their young, what point is there in providing more boxes? There will be no bluebirds to use them.
“That such suggestions are even offered as mitigation for the loss of open space suggests a sad lack of understanding of basic environmental principles and the concept of sustainability.
“It is patently absurd to suggest that the environmental quality of the property will be ‘greatly enhanced’ by 250 new units on the open space, with associated hard surfaces such as roads and parking. Planting a few cedars around the condos in no way mitigates the massive overdevelopment that is planned.”
The Bermuda Audubon Society issued a statement saying that it is disappointed with the announcement from the minister.
“In making this decision,” the statement read. “he has failed to listen to his own Department of Planning, the Development Applications Board and the people of Bermuda.
“By approving this SDO, he has failed in his duty to protect our natural environment and the scenic beauty of our country.”
Need to
Know
2. Please respect the use of this community forum and its users.
3. Any poster that insults, threatens or verbally abuses another member, uses defamatory language, or deliberately disrupts discussions will be banned.
4. Users who violate the Terms of Service or any commenting rules will be banned.
5. Please stay on topic. "Trolling" to incite emotional responses and disrupt conversations will be deleted.
6. To understand further what is and isn't allowed and the actions we may take, please read our Terms of Service