The fate of prime beachfront property in Holetown, St James, sparked a heated debate in Parliament on Friday, with Opposition Leader Ralph Thorne demanding transparency from the government over a land swap deal that he warned could potentially limit public beach access.
Thorne did not object to the land acquisition resolution to acquire almost 75 000 square metres of land at nearby Trents.
But he posed a number of questions to Senior Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office Dr William Duguid, who introduced the resolution to acquire the land to relocate government offices and the police station in the Holetown complex and transfer the site for private development.
“The people of Barbados, though, would want to know, if possible, who is the new tenant on the seaside. The people would want to know whether that tenant is local or foreign.
And that is important . . . when hotels are owned by nonnationals as opposed to nationals,” the opposition leader declared.
He explained that foreign ownership of the property would have foreign exchange implications for the country with the repatriation of profits to another jurisdiction.
“It is a public transaction involving public lands, and therefore the public is entitled to know who are these figures or who is this figure that will come into ownership of these lands,” Thorne said. “What will be the nature of that occupation? Will that say-so be freehold or leasehold? And if it is leasehold, for how long? And if of course, it is freehold, to whom is this freehold being given?”
The opposition leader also called on Duguid to disclose the financial arrangements of the transaction and whether it was a swap of ownership of one piece of property for another.
“In the event of a swap, the people of Barbados expect that this country, this Treasury will benefit financially,” he said.
“I don’t want to use the word secret deal because that will take this debate into contention. My language will be mild.
So that we can be certain that this is not a secret arrangement, please tell the people of Barbados, whether our government, our people are benefiting financially . . . and what will be the nature of the occupation of that lucky entity that will now come into possession of precious beachfront land.”
Also important, he said, was the question of public access to the beach in the area.
The Christ South MP, whose constituency encompasses Oistins, told the House: “Beach access tends to be unhindered when the property on the beach is owned by the government.
There is certainly the example of Oistins. Nobody is shy about traversing through the police station, and what used to be the library, and the polyclinic. . . . Nobody is shy about traversing those premises and going on to the beach.
“However, when it is occupied by private interests, private interests tend to erect barricades. And even if they don’t erect barricades, and even if they reserve a pathway, those pathways tend still to intimidate people.” (IMC1)
The post Opposition demands clarity on Holetown beachfront land deal appeared first on Barbados Today.
