Approval for this project was gratned a long while ago under the hand of Mr Owing See Thru White Rum Arthur, nothing new about this program at all.

Actually investors are being sought to kick off the project, David you have a couple million laying idle?

I have heard that the group is trying to raise this money both in Canada and in the US market as for who they are I do not know.

This should not be overly difficult to secure this information.

I fully support the limitations to converting arable lands to building but I think that it is known fact that the lands of the St.Lucy area are not particularly friendly to farming would be only comment.

Oops, early am ”but I would expect, from a layman’s viewpoint, that there is no reason that we cannot do this on a large scale

I have seen good agricultural land at Goodland in Ch Ch, Mt Brevitor, in St Peter, Welches, St Thomas, Apes Hill, St James/St Andrew, Bennetts and Arch Hall, St. Thomas, Westmoorland, St James, now Lancaster, also in St James and Pickerin in St. Lucy , all going out of agriculture and yet No agriculture policy is declared by either BLP or DLP. Some of the land removed, has such good soil that it is a builder’s nightmare to find a solid foundation on which to construct a house. Yet some simple average bajans are refused permission to sub-divide small lots to allow their siblings to erect a dwelling. When I passed St Philip, some time ago and saw the beauty and quality of the soil being excavated at Grooves Pltn and Four Square Pltn, water came to my eyes. I’m sure Barbados and bajans will pay for this injustice in the not too distant future.

“Development” (the Bajan Model) must have land to exist.

When the land is “developed” more land must be made available to the mill if more “development” is required.

The factory (guess whose) at Four Square (Hardwood is another example) which produces houses needs to have land to deposit its output upon.

If there is no land, there is no need for this factory capacity.

This is quite similar to the situation in large scale agriculture. Land must feed a factory for it to survive.

Close the factories and large scale agriculture dies!!!

The colossal difference between these two different uses of land is that the factories which receive input from agriculture can go on for centuries quite naturally.

The ones which produce output to deposit on land naturally shrivel and die as the land is used up.

Have one set of factories been closed down to facilitate the opening of another set of factories?

Where is the long term good of this practice?

Centuries of agricultural development have gone into the fields and hills of Barbados.

Yet there is no natural forseeable end to large scale agricultural development …… once factory capacity exists,

…. but there is to “development”.

WIV, If “approval of this project was granted a long while ago” under the hand of Mr. Owing Arthur and “nothing new about this program at all” why is an EIA now being required by the Chief Town Planner? It means that there was no approval. Maybe it was given the “blessing” or tacit nod by the previous administration but based on what is now happening it was not approved.

The Pickering Development EIA refers to the PDP 2003 amended and says that the EIA is a requirement of that document. What the EIA does not mention specifically is that the approval will also require an amendment to the PDP2003.

David, why do you say “IF the Town Planner approves the application”? The approval is not in the hands of the Chief Town Planner. I want to reiterate what the PDP 2003 amended says, “ Under exceptional circumstances, non-agricultural development may be considered on agricultural land (SUBECT TO AN EIA AND AMENDMENT TO THE PHYSICAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDED 2003 IN INSTANCES WHERE THE LAND IS GREATER THAN 10 HECTARES/24.7 acres).

The PDP 2003 amended makes it clear that apart from an EIA, Town Hall Meeting and some other procedural requirements the PDD will need to be amended.

The Town Planning Act Cap 240 sets out the procedure for an amendment of the PDP and it includes publishing in the Official Gazette and at least one Newspaper a notice indicating that a change to the plan is proposed, where copies of the proposals can be viewed or purchased etc etc. If any objections or representations are made to the Minister in writing within 28 days of the notice the Minister shall hold a public enquiry.

The Act goes on to say that the amendment must be approved by resolution of both houses of Parliament and shall come into operation on such date after its approval by Parliament. My conclusion is therefore that this approval is actually in the hands of “both houses of Parliament” and not the CTP. Is it within the law for the Minister to grant approval to before Parliament approves the amendment to the PDP?

Will this procedure as set out by The PDP 2003 Amended and Town Planning Act Cap 240 be followed?

This is a good thing for St.Lucy.As long as no golf course is in the plans.The people need housing and some arable land will have to be used.100% for this .

@Nostradamous

We say IF because despite our best effort we have been unable to get a legal position on the issue which you repeated post i.e.amendment to the PDP. At this point we have dropped anchor at the feet of the CTP until he cries foul.

Industrialized Farming Endangers World Food Supply

Multi-national food corporations are increasingly using global food insecurity as a tool for political control. The International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI) reports that “land grabbing” by foreign investors in developing countries has resulted in a new form of colonialism. Spanish NGO, GRAIN reports that rich countries are buying poor countries’ fertile soil, water and sun to ship food and fuel back home. IFPRI researcher Joachim von Braun states, “About one-quarter of these investments are for biofuel plantations.”

Agribusiness imposes a devastating toll on small farmers worldwide. Landowners in African countries, where there are no official land deeds, have no legal recourse against foreign companies that steal their farmland. In the United States ranchers and farmers lose their land to agribusinesses and end up working as employees. American cattle ranchers have the highest suicide rate among American professions. Similar humiliations have also led thousands of farmers in India to take their own lives.

The ‘Global Food Security Act’ [S384] recently introduced in the US Senate will give USAID $7.5 billion over five years. Arun Shrivastava of the Centre for Research on Globalization reports: “USAID is actually an arm of the US-Department of Defense; it serves US foreign policy interest and has little to do with humanism.” There are two other similar pending bills, HR875 and S425.

Continued at:
http://karinfriedemann.blogspot.com/2009/06/industrialized-farming-endangers-world.html

Know someone who attended but arrived after the start so did not catch everything. Principal developer and spokesperson at Town Hall meeting was Yusuf Mohammed. Not sure if that is correct spelling. There were some other “suits” there who appeared to be foreigners.

The actual land that they are seeking change of use for is actually 96 acres at Broomfield and 84 acres at Springhall.

It also seemed that these developers don’t actually own the land at Broomfieled or Springhall but will buy or enter some arrangement with the owner(s).

Developer characterized this new development a new or enlargement of town growing out of Nesfield and sanctioned by PDP.

Sagicor is selling some of its agricultural land. What will we do when we have no more land for Tourism (tourist dont come to see more houses silly lot) and most importantly land for food production!

Our leaders are a bunch of asses!

David – Update – based on what was reported in both daily newspapers this application has been approved.

Is it just me or did the Prime Minister’s statement seem like a PR job for the developers?

Now this snippet in the Advocate, quoting the PM is hilarious “… Included in the proposal is an agricultural component where 20 acres of total site will be utilised for intensive agriculture. Aquaculture is also to be introduced in order to lessen the impact of the significant loss of 180 acres of agricultural land……”

One wonders what the position of The Minister of Agriculture is? Maybe the promise to retain 20 acres in agriculture and Aquaculture are the bones they threw him. What about the usually vocal head of the BAS Mr. James Paul, any comment from him?

St. Lucy is one if the driest parishes. Where they getting the water from for Aguaculture and 20 acres of intensive agriculture not to mention 1161 residential units, 200 unit hotel, primary school 200,000 sq ft commercial space etc etc.?

I understand that at the Town Hall Meeting someone from BWA spoke and contradicted some of the water related assumptions and proposals of the developers.

errata ‘two ‘inflationary attacks’

@Notradamus

It looks like business as usual doesn’t it? This government will have a lot to explain come 2013.

In the mean time, there are some poor people who have enough land that their children could build on a portion of it and these people are daily being refused permission to just cut off a few thousand sq ft for their offspring.

I know of two plots of agricultural land that was rejected for residential development under the ownership of bajans. On both cases, the property was then sold to ex-patriats and approval was subsequently given to the new owners. “One day we would wake up and find that we no longer own this country we now refer as ours”. These words or words similar to these were spoken by my then P.M Errol Barrow, it is manifesting itself everyday.

Hello! gabekek interesting gabekek site! I’m really like it! Very, very gabekek good!