#BTEditorial – St Joseph residents right: “Not ‘bout here”

How many times will developers in Barbados be forced to come to grips with the ire of citizens who take serious offence to moneyed people believing their investments and wealth in this tiny island equates to control of our patronage?

The conflict between investment and access to traditional public spaces by Barbadians has played out in very unpleasant ways on several occasions.

In fact, one of the most iconic social commentaries in our calypso genre, critiques the clash of interests between the well-to-do and well connected who believe their access to the seascape should be enjoyed by them alone, or only at their behest.

Jack, the 1982 resistance song by Cultural Ambassador the Most Honourable Anthony Gabby Carter has become an important theme and subtext of average people in their battles against the rich who take them for granted.

In August 2020 when hundreds of St Lucians protested foreign developers carving out Cas en Bas Beach property for themselves in a development that would deny them access.  It was Jack that they used as their rallying song to make their case.

It is ironic that as the Mighty Gabby prepares to celebrate his 75th birthday on March 30, he has been enlisted by St Joseph residents who vehemently reject plans by outside interests to introduce barriers to one of the most serene and beloved spots in the parish.

Joe’s River may not mean much to urban residents, but it is cherished by the residents of St Joseph and other rural folk who have a generational connection to the gully ecosystem and the area they call the “teacup and saucer”.

Residents have affirmed their approval of the redevelopment of the former Edgewater Hotel. As far as they are concerned, the two sides can live harmoniously. However, the new Australian developers, Ullswater, have sought to introduce a wall. Gates and walls have a way of being discordant and exclusionary. It has been no different on this occasion.

The rural folk, who fear they will be disadvantaged and denied access to the area have said a resounding no to the move. They have mobilised themselves, articulated their concerns to the rest of Barbados, and have got the support of the Cultural Ambassador who has added his personal capital and presence to the fight.

Without resorting to blocking roads or threatening harm to anyone, the residents have kept up the public pressure. Sentiment appears to be on their side because Barbadians have been this road before on many occasions.

Whether it was the Sandals war of words over access to the south coast beach, or at Accra where southern residents felt a planned development would deny them access to the popular beachfront area, or the debacle over the construction of a bar that is literally on the narrowest of beaches at Fitts Village, St James, the story is the same.

Barbadians continue to reject the idea that owning a beach front property means ownership of the beach. The people of St Joseph have every right to kick dust over the developer’s actions if they believe it is a high-handed move, even if it was approved by the Planning and Development Department.

“This is madness and this cannot be allowed to continue. We want this man to knock down that wall, and stop the project over there because it is unfair. It is wrong and it is an injustice,” Gabby has stated.

Architect and resident Steve Jemmott registered his disappointment that the Chief Town Planner or the persons that made this decision did so “without consultation with the persons in the Bathsheba area and St Joseph as a whole”.

To their credit, the developers have recognised they cannot have a successful tourism project by offending their neighbours in the community.

They have stopped some parts of the construction and moved to engage.

Communications consultant Richard Haynes has sought to assure residents that the new property owners “intend to work seamlessly and complement the community, rather than work against the community”. That they want to “engage the local community to consult so they can come up with a solution”.

If this assertion is correct, then this matter may have a better outcome than it appears presently.