Some of the problems of this society would be alleviated if those who sat in government spent more time discussing their plans with various interested groups before steamrolling ahead implementing decisions that the citizenry knows little or nothing about. What usually happens is that these decisions are taken in camera, so to speak, and by the time they get into the public domain, they are already a fait accompli, meaning there would be a huge amount of face to lose if the powers-that-be were to reverse them. As it is, therefore, no matter how flawed a given plan might be, it goes ahead in the teeth of the most rational criticism and the most common sense objections.
And so it is with this proposed new hotel in Kingston, which has been parachuted down on the Georgetown populace without a whisper of prior discussion. The Greater Georgetown Development Plan had the area earmarked for mostly recreational facilities. On the basis of that, therefore, Environmental Management Consultants which conducted the Environmental Social Impact Assessment for the developers, deemed the site suitable for the hotel. But suitable for whom? Not for Georgetowners whose opinions were not canvassed and who will be excluded from its casino, which is the main reason for building the hotel in the first place.
No one is so naïve as to assume that such a large hotel – and it will be large – could attract overseas visitors without the casino. And those are not the kind of visitors who will have an overwhelming interest in Guyana’s eco-tourism sites, or historical Georgetown or whatever. And the decision about the casinos is at the root of the current problem. President Jagdeo, following standard practice, effectively consulted after the decision had already been made to amend the law to facilitate casinos, and he clung doggedly to his position, despite opposition from the senior representatives of every major faith in this country. So here we will have an enormous hotel which will be sustained by an enormous casino designed for the recreation of foreigners alone, thereby denying to Georgetowners an area designated for their recreation.
But that is not all. We are now discovering that the hotel will obscure a national monument at best, and may well undermine its foundation at worst. The Kingston Lighthouse which has been guiding mariners for one hundred and seventy-eight years, could be under threat from the pile-driving which would be necessary to construct the hotel. And so, it might be added, could the foundations of the sea wall and other buildings in the vicinity, according to an engineer to whom this newspaper spoke.
Since only the problem of obscuring the lighthouse has so far been acknowledged, the proposal is to place a beacon on top of the new hotel. While no doubt that would add to the cachet of an otherwise unremarkable inn, it would mean that one of Georgetown’s oldest landmarks would be obliterated. Were the citizens of Georgetown or their representative groups asked their opinion on that? Was the view of the Guyana National Trust sought? Was the Guyana Heritage Society approached? The least that can be said in the circumstances is that the government’s patter about heritage and historical tourism is nothing but that: patter.
And there were other options which could have accommodated the government’s economic concerns in the longer term, enhanced the historical interest of the area and by extension its tourism potential. It was architect Mr Lennox Hernandez who expressed it directly, telling this newspaper: “Fort Groyne is a very historical area. There is a lot of history there. Building a hotel on that site would be taking away the history from the people. I think history should be recreated to benefit all Guyanese.” In addition, he bemoaned the fact that the Luckhoo Swimming Pool had not been reconstructed, suggesting that it could still be rebuilt to add to the capital’s limited recreational facilities.
It was in 1806 that the British placed a beacon on the East Coast to guide ships, charging them a nominal fee in order to maintain it. In 1817, however, they put up a lighthouse, which since it was built of wood was probably not very durable. Thirteen years later, therefore, it was replaced by the present structure. The Fort Groyne, to which Mr Hernandez referred, is all that remains of Fort William Frederick, which once guarded the entrance to the Demerara River. It was a small fortification by all reports, and one writer said that it was so low-lying that at high tide a frigate could fire straight into it.
However, the general point that Mr Hernandez was making by implication was that Kingston was the area of early British military settlement, a fact that is recorded in the nomenclature of the ward – Barrack Street, Fort Street, Parade Street, Camp Street/Road, etc. For a period when the shore went further out than it does now (there was actually a sand beach) the governors were ensconced in Camp House, a breezy, commodious structure sited probably somewhere near the Roundhouse. The British military cemetery can still be seen in Kingston, while the police occupy some of the later military barracks erected in 1837. Whatever else one has to say about the Guyana Police Force, in terms of the preservation of these buildings they cannot be faulted.
What was once the village and camp of Kingston, therefore, played a role in the early development of the city, and with a bit of imagination the whole area has the potential for the development of historical tourism, and for educating children and connecting them with a segment of local history. This is not forgetting, of course, rebuilding the swimming pool for genuinely local recreation purposes. But then, the people who live in Georgetown appear to come very low on the administration’s list of priorities, as do national monuments. Grasping the value of anything that comes before 1947, it seems, is a something of a challenge for the government.
Whether they grasp it or not, however, the larger point is that the people of this city should surely have some say when radical reconfigurations to the zones where they live are involved, particularly when these include a fundamental change in the character of an area and the possible destruction, or at least the obscuring, of a national landmark. And at a practical level the government surely cannot bulldoze ahead if there is any possibility that the pile-driving for the hotel could pose a threat to any structure in the area, not excluding the sea wall. Where matters like these are concerned, no responsible administration can proceed merely on the hope it will not happen. At the very least, that is an area in need of further exploration.
And if the government does accede to the destruction of the character and potential for development of a ward, and ignores the possible danger to surrounding structures, what will the people get in return?
A casino.
