Thorne flags inequality in Storm Water Bill

Opposition Leader Ralph Thorne is questioning whether the controversial Holetown development will fall under the proposed Storm Water Management Bill, warning that developers must not be exempt from its provisions while ordinary citizens face penalties.

Debating the legislation in Parliament on Tuesday, Thorne zeroed in on Clause 17 of the Bill, which requires developers to submit stormwater drainage plans for approval. 

He however pointed out that the clause carries no criminal penalties for noncompliance—unlike Clause 19, which imposes a $20 000 fine for individuals who improperly dispose of stormwater into public infrastructure without permission from the chief technical officer.

“This legislation criminalises the owner who releases water from his land without permission, but not the developer who fails to submit a drainage plan that could prevent that water from flooding the land in the first place,” Thorne said.

He further warned that the omission could create the perception of unequal treatment under the law and questioned whether the developers behind the Holetown project, which recently influenced public protest over its environmental impact, would be bound by the Bill once enacted.

The Holetown project, which is to see the redevelopment of the Holetown Civic Centre, proposing the construction of a major commercial and residential development in one of the island’s most flood-prone and culturally sensitive areas, has been the subject of sustained opposition from environmental groups, political parties, and concerned citizens.

“Will the developers of the Holetown project be captured by this legislation? Or have they escaped the net, the progressive net, of this legislation?” Thorne questioned.

He criticised what he said was the government’s handling of major developments, particularly where environmental risks and heritage lands are concerned, noting that Barbadians are becoming increasingly concerned. 

“The people are still expressing discontent. They have gone quiet, but they have not become content,” he said.

“Government should not delude itself that the silence on Holetown represents acquiescence in what it has been doing to that precious piece of heritage land.”

Clause 17 of the Bill mandates that developers submit a stormwater drainage plan to the director of planning and development, who may then forward it to the chief technical officer for approval.

However, Thorne noted that this clause functions more as guidance than enforceable law, since it carries no penalties if ignored.

He compared this with Clause 19, which criminalises individuals who dispose of stormwater in public drainage infrastructure without approval, and questioned why developers were not held to the same standard.

“If we are at the mercy of the elements and we are going to penalise owners with criminal sanction, let us join everyone with equal treatment,” he said. 

“Let us, in penalising the owner, also penalise the developer—who may not even live here, who may be an absentee landlord.”

He further expressed concern that Section 25 of the Bill, which outlines general penalties, also fails to cover developers, as it applies only to provisions of the Bill that are explicitly defined as offenses charging that “the developer again escapes” sanctions. 

While acknowledging that the Bill is timely and necessary to address growing threats from flooding, he urged the government to revisit Clause 17 and include appropriate sanctions to ensure developers are brought within the full scope of the law. (SM)