Est.2007

Barbados Underground

Bringing News and Opinions to the People

Did Chief Town Planner Mark Cummins Make Joke?

← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

CONTACT THE BLOGMASTER ONLY

Submitted by Bush Tea

Mark Cummins – Chief Town Planner/Nation Newspaper

I laughed out loud at the Chief Town Planner (CTP) – see Nation Article. He is clearly well on the way to becoming a top civil servant like our friend George…..

There is no way in hell that government can do anything to owners of these lots other than what they already have all the legislation needed to do – require them to keep their lots clean.

Can you ask for anything simpler than that???!!

.. now if the ‘yo yo’s in government cannot enforce a simple, practical HEALTH law that requires the owners of these properties to keep them free of rubbish, bush, water and other rodent-and-mosquito breeding facilities….
…how would you rate the likelihood of them doing anything more drastic…?

But Mark is a giant (pun intended) of a man and he knows how to sound important and impactful – while talking a roll (good practice for ‘Permanent Secretaryship’ LOL)

The bushman was particularly impressed with the serious look on his face – cause he surely had to be rolling with laughter inside at the very thought of what he was saying.

Look!

Barbados is an island in the tourist business. ANY IDIOT can see that the place NEEDS to be kept clean and tidy – not even to mention hygienic. We already have health laws that can deal with the problem of abandoned lots. What we DON’T have are any half-way-competent public servants who can actually DO SOMETHING instead of just talking S…. at press meetings.

If Hants had to pay someone $100 per month to keep his lot clean –
– his neighbours would be grateful (and dengue free);
– Someone would have a likkle pick
-we would be holding some Canadian $ in foreign exchange
-Hants would be more focused on improving the lot
– Hants would be more open to reselling the lot
– Hants would fork his behind back home oukka the cold
– the whole place would look better

…..so do you see who the fatalist is now David?
Not BT.
It is all of us Bajans – who like um so.

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

28 responses to “Did Chief Town Planner Mark Cummins Make Joke?”

  1. Avatar
    Anonymous

    He’s not an idiot – he’s a JACKASS. it only shows how most public servants in high position thinks, i.e ‘I’m here to make money for myself, I don’t give a damn about the country’. his retarded statement shows the level of stupidity in him.

  2. Hants Avatar
    Hants

    @Bush Tea
    Your literary skills are exemplary.

    As David alluded to in a previous post, Hants went to Kolij but he can’t write too good so he has to rely on fellas like you an GP for erudite contributions.

  3. Avatar
    Anonymous

    he is not an idiot, he is a public JACKASS. his statement shows the level of his stupidity on issues related to Barbados and shows that like so many top civil servants, they are there to make money for themselves and don’t give a rat’s bottom about the country they are called to serve.

  4. Bush Tea Avatar
    Bush Tea

    But David, what kind of big foot trick is this? this was just a tongue in cheek response to Hants – The bushman was trying to see if he would sell off some of that real estate he holding bout here…LOL

    Anyway, since you make it into a post let me add he best part of the CTP’s speech

    You check when he said that they were working on a five year plan – WHICH HE HOPED TO FINISH OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS!!! Ha Ha Ha HAH LOL ROTFL

    ….bout here sooooo sweet – only Bonny Peppa has the linguistic skills needed to properly articulate the shoite that does happen bout here.

  5. David Avatar
    David

    @Bush Tea

    That was a good joke in truth or Hants would prefer the extraction from the Bajan lexicon ‘trut’…lol

    Don’t worry, you know BU is a place people come to make sport, it is not a forum where academic etiquette is required…LOL.

  6. Yardbroom Avatar
    Yardbroom

    When “every” lot is brutalized with concrete and green is a colour only seen in a paint pot, and open spaces are no more. . . what then?

  7. Enuff Avatar
    Enuff

    Section 11 (1) of the Town Planning Act states:
    ‘At least once in every five years after the date on which a development plan for the whole of the Island comes into operation, the Chief Town Planner shall carry out a fresh
    survey of the Island and submit to the Minister a report of the
    survey together with proposals for any alterations or additions
    to the plan that appear to him to be required.’
    As far as I know the last amendment was approved in 2008 which means that the next amended plan is due in 2013, which is 3 years from 2010. So the CTP and his staff will be, during the next 3 years, working on a 5 year plan.
    Furthermore his argument never appeared to be about the unsanitary condition of vacant lots BUT the impact such lots have on the land market i.e. speculation; and yes the government can, in the future, apply conditions which make the development of lots within a stated time period obligatory.
    The CTP comments seem a little disingenuous however given that he failed to mention that the continued practice of promoting single family lots (zero lot included) is the biggest threat to the land market.

  8. islandgal246 Avatar
    islandgal246

    What these people who are in these positions are ignorant of :

    1. Open land contributes to the diversity of plant and insect life that is necessary for the balance of nature which is important to the food chain.

    2. It cools and refreshes the environment that allows the passage of wind and breezes.

    3. It is a natural habitat for migrating birds and local butterflies.

    4. People can change their minds after applying for permission to subdivide and build.

    5. A land owner should not be penalized for owning land, he should be prosecuted if it poses a health and security threat to the community.

    6. Not everyone can be a house owner and landowners should not be made to feel coerced to sell.

    7. Land will not get cheaper and will always be in short supply.

    8. Should something be done about the damage quarrying is doing to our landscape? Many of our ridges have been stripped and flattened because of the building boom. The landscape of this beautiful island is forever scarred. Large gaping wounds have been left, probably to become future landfills. These ridges act as a buffer during hurricanes, they are the only high land we have.

    9. If this day comes it will be a very, very sad day for Barbados.

    10. Please, please, tell me this is a bad dream.

  9. Avatar
    Anonymous

    My wife and I bought a single lot (5000 sq ft) in 1998. We intended to construct a house on it but the realities of life intruded (children were born, parents fell sick and required long term care, one of us got laid off…). Up to now the best we can do is pay the high land tax, keep the lot tidy and dream. One day maybe we will build or at least give it to one of the children or sell it to help pay the children’s university fees which is not too far off. By the way we rent the house we presently live in. Now this civil servant rasshole wants to suggest that we be made to sell the only piece of real estate we own because we cant afford to build right now. Why doesn’t he start with the considerable land holdings of the Government vis-a-vis NHC ?

  10. Enuff Avatar
    Enuff

    @ Island Gal
    You clearly lost.

  11. The People's Democratic Congress Avatar
    The People’s Democratic Congress

    It seems that the planning authorities in Barbados have stumbled their way around towards the position that we in the PDC have long been articulating, and which is this: that a future PDC Government of the people will mandate that owners of rights to land spaces in Barbados will have to carry out the agreed purpose for the development of such land space within a stipulated period of time (grace period added), and that any failure to do so within that time, will realize that ownership of those rights by them will lapse, and will become temporarily in the possession of the government until such a time as there are Barbadian citizens and enterprises that will be bona fide buyers of such rights.

    See our 2006 Pre-Election Manifesto.

    We in the PDC have long believed also that too many land spaces remain idle/unused in this country, at a time when so many persons and other entities in the country wish land spaces on which to do so many things, and at a time too when the cost of land space rights are costing ever so much, and are therefore beyond the reaches of the average citizen the average micro small business.

    However, we did come up with the above described far-reaching rational policy on the basis of the crafting of other policies that would have had to be consistent with it in order for it to achieve its maximum effect value.

    Thus, a serious analysis of our various policies will indicate that we are strong believers in the creation of coherence and consistency and clarity among our various policy measures.

    Hence, we have thought that a future PDC Government would only seek to put such a policy in place once certain pre-conditions have been satisfied – totally or substantially, or are emerging at the same time as this policy would be being put in place, that is to say –

    1) The implementation of the NO-TAXATION paradigm;

    2) The implementation of the NO-INTEREST RATES paradigm;

    3) The implementation of the non- INSTITUTIONAL REPAYABLE PRODUCTIVE LOANS paradigm;

    4) The making sure that imports of goods and services in this country were zero-“priced” at all ponits of entry;

    5) The establishment of regime whereby in Barbados land space rights will only be capable of being BOUGHT, SOLD OR LEASED, AT ADMINISTRATIVE, NOMINAL COSTS;

    6) The making sure that in regard of 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, they are totally or substantially achieved so as to help achieve the effect of drastically reducing building costs in this country;

    7) The establishment of a regime wherefore no foreigners were capable of owning land space rights in this country – that they would only be capable of leasing such rights – at administrative nominal costs from Barbadian citizens, households, families, businesses;

    8) The implementation of a regime wherefore a maximum limit was placed on the amount of acres in land space rights that any Barbadian citizen, household, business, entity. etc. would be able to own in this country – as well as a maximum limit on the amount of building spaces such individuals,households, businesses, etc would be able to own;

    9) The implementation of a regime of rent control for the use of any buildings – government or private owned – whether used for residential, commercial, social or recreational purposes;

    10) The development of a proper land use policy clearly demarcating what lands must be used for;

    11) The implementation of a process of reform and restructuring of the Town and Country Planning subsidiary of the government and which would involve removing from it the power to enforce the dismantlement/ the destruction of the properties of others – even though seen as responses for persons/entities failures to heed notices of violations of certain town and country planning rules – and thus making it a very highly serviced advisory professional office.

    It is clear that without a proper effective template – like the one that we have so painstakingly sedulously produced – for the implementation of such a time limit period within which building must take place on these lots, or else the lapsing of such rights over the lands, that such an policy initiative as proposed by the Chief Town Planner would be fraught with and bound to achieve so much thoughtlessness, unreasonableness, haphazardness and ill-direction, that one would have to wonder what is/are the real purpose/s of proposing such a measure and seeking to implement it.

    For, clearly those features can be interpolated into the proposal and into what might surround it, even at this stage, and can be deduced from the reported utterances and from within the gaps between what he did not say and what he did say reportedly.

    We would really urge Barbadian apprised of this still born rough shod proposal to think better and away from it – as it stands so shakily by itself – by joining the PDC so that we in this country would be able to see the realization of the proper implementation of what is an otherwise brilliant idea.

    PDC

  12. Bush Tea Avatar
    Bush Tea

    @ enuff

    Good defense of the CTP enuff.
    So let us look at the facts.

    1. This is the twenty first century. The age of sequential planning cycles ended in the 1980’s. A 5 year planning cycle is now a long term plan, updates are implemented AS NEEDED. In other words, serious managers do NOT wait until the end of a five-year cycle to implement needed changes.
    Besides, why should it take more than 3 months to do a comprehensive review of the development plan? why should the 5-year plan not be updated at least annually?

    2 Nobody is saying that the CTP was arguing about the unsanitary conditions of lots. The point made was that THERE IS NO WAY that any serious sanctions will be applied – indeed, even the HEALTH regulations are proving to be unimplementable.
    Bush Tea made the point that IF we could implement the existing health regulations, then the VERY SAME objectives articulated by the CTP could be achieved.

    Finally, Bush Tea thought that you would extend your last point about zero lots to complain about their approach of creating ‘housing lots’ instead of designing people-centered communities. In fact, why are we not designing VILLAGES modeled on the traditional concept that naturally worked for our parents.
    This could be a concept that encourages extended family, play areas, small business etc…

  13. ac Avatar
    ac

    Why everbody wants to put a building here or wherever there is apiece of land. How about planting we own food so that if there is ever a food shortage world wide we wont have to go begging nobody fuh nutting, Wunna tink it can’t happen. Stupseee! building here ! building there we can’t eat all dem buildings. Wunna got to plan propely for the livelihoods of people.Who de hell vote for dese nincanpoops

  14. Bush Tea Avatar
    Bush Tea

    There is no way in hell that any government can tell someone to build or sell.
    ….and then do what?

    If a family invests in a piece of land and then finds it more financially challenging than they had planned – they have to sell to someone else and invest the money (in CLICO?)

    Don’t even start with that junk Mark, otherwise you wont even make PS. LOL

    At MOST, land owners owe it to neighbors to keep it clean.

  15. Hants Avatar
    Hants

    Bajans like me that grow up in a 2 bedroom chattel house were taught that we should save money to buy land and stop renting tenantry land.

    Some of our parents were fortunate to do so.

    We the children were encouraged to follow the guidance of our parents and when we became successful adults we bought land to build our own home.
    Some of us had to struggle for 10 years or more before we could start building a house.

    Putting a time limit on development of house spots is anathema to a principle that is part of the emancipation of black people.

    Is it fair that because I have some cash and an accomodating Banker and is therefore able to build a house within a year, that my black hard workin neighbour who sending school 3 children and helping one at BCC or UWI while buying medication for a sick mother, should be punished for being unable to build a house on a spot that he bought 12 years ago and still can’t find money to build a House on it.

    David yuh see why I does can’t write nuh heavy stuff fuh you and why Bush tea had to step in?

    I does get so grass bowl mad when I see how easy it is for Bajans to forget dat most ah we come from board an shingle house.
    We does fuget dat we gran farders did fishermun an carpenter an labourers.
    We does fuget dat some uh de frens we grow up wid din guh to Kolij or Cawmere and ain’t got nuh degrees an doan mek de kinda money like Bush Tea,Negroman or GP.

    We does forget dat we ain’t like de rite people who got millions in de bank and can do tings in “no time flat”.

    Wunna cuh cuss me now.

  16. David Avatar
    David

    @Hants

    You need to get angry more often.

  17. Bosun Avatar
    Bosun

    @Islandgal
    Number 11. Open land also allows much of the rain water,to dissipate into the earth. Last week was a classic QED,especially in those concrete jungles of housing developments.

  18. The People's Democratic Congress Avatar
    The People’s Democratic Congress

    Since it is clear that no one can ever own land – it must mean that it is the rights/interests over such lands that are ownable tradeable even.

    Only property that is man-made can be owned and the rights/interests over such property ownable for a long as the property exists.

    Well, since it is the case that such rights over land are ownable tradeable, the having of such rights is fundamentally tied to the USE of such spaces FOR WHATEVER DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES.

    A failure to USE such spaces within a reasonable time therefore means that one would be in fundamental breach of the agreement over which those rights were accorded.

    Such a fundamental breach of that sort could at the most mean forfeiture of those ownership rights.

    Since it is entirely illogical for persons/entities to be given rights to refuse TO MAKE USE of such lands, then there must be a reasonable time period within which such rights must be exercized by the owners or their agents.

    Since no one really owns land, and because land is the most valuable resource and is therefore tied up in the entire progress of the country, every effort must be made to make sure that persons maximize opportunities for making use of the land, and mimimize the time use is NOT made of the land.

    As it stands now, both these dreaded intellectually bankrupt old traditional DLP and BLP factions do not have a damn clue as to how to properly balance as much as possible all those rights and interests (and competing ones too) over land in this country, different sets against other sets, and not a damn clue as to how to make sure that those rights and interests are really asserted.

    So, Down with the Damned DLP and the Blasted BLP!!!

    To hell with both these traditional parties.

    PDC

  19. Enuff Avatar
    Enuff

    @ Bush Tea
    Not necessarily defending the CTP but was humbly stating what the law stipulates.
    1.
    Any government that requests a 3 month comprehensive review/preparation and our annual update of our PDP ought to be imprisoned; and anyone who supports that approach should be institutionalised down Black Rock even if they graced Crumpton Street with their presence.
    The fact that the man said the review will stretch over a 3 year period proves that they are not waiting until the end and it also indicates that ‘annual’ analyses are conducted. Moreover, the CTP can make a decision on an application based on ‘material considerations’ i.e. policies/positions that develop after the enactment of the PDP including those identified during the referenced 3 year review. This further confirms that there is ongoing decision-making/change.
    2
    Unless the health regulations make building rather than just cleaning mandatory then such regulations are useless within this context. The allocation of land for housing is tied to projected population changes so persons who own/purchase lots but live overseas are therefore not captured in the census. Persons who buy lots but do not develop them also make it difficult for sound housing projections to be done because they remain part of the non-home owner grouping even though they are landowners. The absence of conditions governing a time-frame for development of subdivisions encourage speculation in the market by reducing land supply without the corresponding changes on the housing demand side.
    3.
    My argument was based on the unsustainable and under utilisation of our land resources with regards to housing. Now I’ll address the issue of ‘people-centred’ communities.
    The development of the village was organic. Not only did people live in closer proximity, but the presence of the extended family and the lack of cars, credit cards and cheque books also played a key role in engendering social interaction and the building of community. Fast forward to 2010 and we now have portable credit instruments, e-commerce, e-communication and increased mobility which have lessened the reliance on the village shop; and unfortunately have given residents far greater options for socialising which in many instances preclude their own neighbours.
    I am not a supporter of the inclusion of facilities proposed for Coverley in every housing development if at all, as I believe such a policy is unsustainable, undermines the regional development strategies (town centres) and also ignores the emergence of car ownership and technology.
    First of all Barbados is SMALL and a regional rather than local approach ought to predominate. It is also known that people do most of their errands during that trip to and from work; therefore the emphasis should be on concentrating office accommodation in and around town centres where these everyday services could be accessed and a more flexible, dynamic and reliable public transportation system. These offices, however, should be done without overkill as is the case at Warrens with the construction of two new government buildings. These should have been built on a site along the ABC highway east of the Sagicor Roundabout—that parcel of land at Kingsland to the east of Hinds Transport seems a good option. But even without such a set up, there are banking, post office and petrol facilities on the way to and from Coverley–Oistins, Airport, Pilgrim Road, Callenders, Wildey, Kendall Hill, Top Rock, Six Roads, Kirtons.
    Already people are receiving less snail mail and more electronic mail, even bills (which currently account for most postal mail) are going electronic; banking is now fully electronic and with expanded services and more user friendly applications (customer comfort with using online and ATM services) the idea of personal banking in a branch will become near extinct. Day care facilities should be close to where people work not where they live!! The idea is that a mother or father can during lunch break go look for their young child.
    I, however, unequivocally support the inclusion of retail facilities for certain small businesses especially the ‘village shop’; and community centres, open spaces (parks etc) and recreational facilities in or around housing developments. I have a preference for the provision of facilities that are strategically located to serve more than one development because it is more sustainable, could lead to better quality and more variety as well as facilitate not just intra but also inter-community interaction.

  20. Avatar
    Anonymous

    @ Hants
    “Is it fair that because I have some cash and an accomodating Banker and is therefore able to build a house within a year, that my black hard workin neighbour who sending school 3 children and helping one at BCC or UWI while buying medication for a sick mother, should be punished for being unable to build a house on a spot that he bought 12 years ago and still can’t find money to build a House on it.”

    what you describe was what was legislated for the enslaved, they were punished for being poor and the whites were rewarded for being rich even tho their’s came at the expense of the enslaved and the enslave circumstances at the hands of the whites, it is the same thing today

  21. islandgal246 Avatar
    islandgal246

    @Bosun
    Thank you sooo much, I can’t imagine how I forgot to mention this VERY important point. In the land of the MAD the half mad ones who make some sense is deemed as totally insane. Then we have the experts on drainage who build drains to run uphill and the nasty stinking Bajans who have become so used to litter and filth around, them can’t see how dirty the island has become and the problems it brings.

    @David

    Please do an article on how dirty Barbadians have become . I hiked a few weeks ago in Chalky mount, and I couldn’t believe the amount of garbage that was seen around peoples homes. There was also a section of woods where there were piles and piles of dumped garbage. This has become a very serious matter. We can become too comfortable in our shit and still believe that we are still cleaner than some of our neighbours.

  22. David Avatar
    David

    @islandgal

    Did you take pics? Your suggestion is noted.

  23. Yardbroom Avatar
    Yardbroom

    To enact a policy with a specified time frame for building for Barbadians; when someone can come, from say “Denmark” and build a house on the beach in Barbados, because they have the money. When “foreigners” in Denmark cannot own a beach house is simply folly.

    Such a policy would deny Barbadians whose parents have sacrificed, lived and died for hundreds of years in Barbados; on a short term, short sighted policy.

    No wonder foreigners think we are “fools” and exploit us accordingly.

  24. BDs Hot Sauce Avatar
    BDs Hot Sauce

    I found this article irritating. For a potential law to say by when and that you should develop or face the consequence of loosing said land, is suggesting that your hard earned money and your land is not at all yours. The hard work of many a grandfather and granmother still goes unpunished.

    Why not take a look and re legislate how land is easily approved for monstrous developments spanning acres, with no real value added to Barbadians looking to own piece of the rock other than driving up land prices.

  25. islandgal246 Avatar
    islandgal246

    @David
    No I didn’t take any pics, my camera’s memory was full when I came across the garbage. I will return and take some and send them to you.

  26. WTF! Avatar
    WTF!

    I inherited a plot of land from my father, who purchased it along with another plot with a house. The idea being he did not wish to have someone living so close up under him.
    As of today, it is the only open (undeveloped) plot of land in the neighbourhood. I maintain it, keep it clean, mowed, groomed ect and pay landtax every year.
    The neighbourhood children use it to fly kites, play games, and enjoy being children.
    Are you going to tell me that I must either now erase the only place the children have to play, and build a structure on it (does a board and shingle shack count?) or face losing the property which my father worked hard to afford, and left me?
    ASININE!!

  27. Bad Man sayin nuttin Avatar
    Bad Man sayin nuttin

    I don’t think many of you understand the issue. Many of the people who own lots own 3, 4, 5, 10 housing spots. In a country like Barbados where we are struggling to keep agricultural land in production we simply can’t justify continuing to subdivide agricultural land when we have 30,000 vacant house lots approved and subdivided for housing, some of them from as long as 30 to 35 years ago. If those 30,000 lots were forced on the market it would depress the exorbitant land prices and satisfy housing needs while stimulating construction and allowing agricultural land to be retained and used in food production. The average Bajan only thinking about himself but doesn’t understand that he supporting a system which allows those with readily available capital to buy and horde housing lots to the detriment of an entire nation. The average working class Bajan struggles to buy and own one piece of land let alone 3 or 4. Who do you think owns these lots? the average bajan may own a few but the majority of them are owned by those in the top 10% income earners. I don’t mind the right of a person to invest and speculate but in many countries this right is abrogated when the commodity is deemed to be strategic to the national interest. look at the US’ treatment of corn growers in the 70s and 80s. land management and food security are critical to Barbados’ continued development and the interests of a few should not be allowed to imperil a country.

  28. ac Avatar
    ac

    @BMSN
    Well said agree!

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

    Trending

    Discover more from Barbados Underground

    Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

    Continue reading