Tweet
What if NEPA is wrong and the Hanoverians are right?
Friday, February 15, 2008
We know that this might be the last thing that Mr Dale Delapenha, the proprietor of the controversial Royale Rest cemetery in Burntground Hanover, may want o hear.
After all, he must be hurting over the blatant and lawless trampling of his right to conduct burials at the site which represents an investment of some J$40 million on his part.
Add to that the work of arsonists who torched a section of the property last week, destroying heavy-duty equipment, and the failure so far by the police to bring anyone to book for it, and the nightmare gets worse.
But even as we sympathise with Mr Delapenha and endorse Hanover's Deputy Superintendent of Police, Dermot Lawrence's resolve to ensure that anarchy and disorder do not prevail over Mr Delapenha's right to use the property, we are forced to ask a very important question.
What if the concerns of the Hanover residents, who, according to the story on the front page of yesterday's edition of our sister title, the Observer West, say their protests are based on fears that the formaldehyde in the embalming fluid could contaminate their water supply, are valid?
What if the National Environment and Planning Agency (NEPA), which gave Mr Delapenha the green light to conduct mass burials at Royale Rest, erred?
After all, if the residents are to be believed, they have been warned over the years by other organs of government not to bury animals in their community because of the potential danger to the water supply. Also, the closing of the cemetery at nearby Shettlewood raises a flag that needs to be fully understood before this venture proceeds.
And NEPA is, after all, comprised of humans, who, like the rest of us, are far from perfect.
Formaldehyde is an extremely carcinogenic substance which has the potential of causing irreparable damage to the body's organs. Indeed, this space could not amply facilitate a thorough discussion of the health hazards that a contaminated water supply could pose to the public.
Suffice it to say that the concerns expressed by the residents are grave enough to warrant another probe, maybe from a source outside of this jurisdiction, into the veracity of NEPA's recommendations.
Hopefully, such a probe would lay the issue to rest (no pun intended) once and for all.
For the sooner this controversy, which must be sending a graphic signal to potential investors, is put to rest, the better.
In the meantime, maybe Mr Delapenha might well be advised to reconsider his resolve to conduct burials at the property come hell or high water, so to speak.
For if the residents, who are reportedly gearing up to ask the Supreme Court for an injunction to block burials there, succeed, he's going to be in for a bit of a wait to utilise the property, pending the resolution of the issue, which could take years to travel through the court system.
As we understand it, Royale Rest is a picturesque 17-acre property which could be put to many other uses.
Maybe Mr Delapenha could consider opting for one of them.
Just in case.
Friday, February 15, 2008
We know that this might be the last thing that Mr Dale Delapenha, the proprietor of the controversial Royale Rest cemetery in Burntground Hanover, may want o hear.
After all, he must be hurting over the blatant and lawless trampling of his right to conduct burials at the site which represents an investment of some J$40 million on his part.
Add to that the work of arsonists who torched a section of the property last week, destroying heavy-duty equipment, and the failure so far by the police to bring anyone to book for it, and the nightmare gets worse.
But even as we sympathise with Mr Delapenha and endorse Hanover's Deputy Superintendent of Police, Dermot Lawrence's resolve to ensure that anarchy and disorder do not prevail over Mr Delapenha's right to use the property, we are forced to ask a very important question.
What if the concerns of the Hanover residents, who, according to the story on the front page of yesterday's edition of our sister title, the Observer West, say their protests are based on fears that the formaldehyde in the embalming fluid could contaminate their water supply, are valid?
What if the National Environment and Planning Agency (NEPA), which gave Mr Delapenha the green light to conduct mass burials at Royale Rest, erred?
After all, if the residents are to be believed, they have been warned over the years by other organs of government not to bury animals in their community because of the potential danger to the water supply. Also, the closing of the cemetery at nearby Shettlewood raises a flag that needs to be fully understood before this venture proceeds.
And NEPA is, after all, comprised of humans, who, like the rest of us, are far from perfect.
Formaldehyde is an extremely carcinogenic substance which has the potential of causing irreparable damage to the body's organs. Indeed, this space could not amply facilitate a thorough discussion of the health hazards that a contaminated water supply could pose to the public.
Suffice it to say that the concerns expressed by the residents are grave enough to warrant another probe, maybe from a source outside of this jurisdiction, into the veracity of NEPA's recommendations.
Hopefully, such a probe would lay the issue to rest (no pun intended) once and for all.
For the sooner this controversy, which must be sending a graphic signal to potential investors, is put to rest, the better.
In the meantime, maybe Mr Delapenha might well be advised to reconsider his resolve to conduct burials at the property come hell or high water, so to speak.
For if the residents, who are reportedly gearing up to ask the Supreme Court for an injunction to block burials there, succeed, he's going to be in for a bit of a wait to utilise the property, pending the resolution of the issue, which could take years to travel through the court system.
As we understand it, Royale Rest is a picturesque 17-acre property which could be put to many other uses.
Maybe Mr Delapenha could consider opting for one of them.
Just in case.
Comment