PAAC split by Goat Islands issue

[Sir X]

PAAC split by Goat Islands issue



JACKSON ... request from JET outside the remit SHAW ... this has nothing to do with politics of the PAAC

THE row over the proposed Chinese investment in the Goat Islands has become the major issue in Parliament, and has now seeped into at least one committee of the House of Representatives -- the Public Administration and Appropriations Committee (PAAC).

For the past two weeks the question of whether or not the PAAC should invite the Jamaica Environmental Trust (JET), and other stakeholders in the proposed project, to its meeting has dominated issues before the committee.

The members spent more than an hour deliberating on the matter last Thursday, before dealing with the First Supplementary Estimates 2013/14, while public servants invited to the meeting waited in the lobby.

Two weeks ago, members of committee agreed that there was no problem in accepting a request from JET to make a presentation on the environmental issues surrounding the proposed Goat Islands project. In addition, former Minister of Transport and Works, Opposition MP Mike Henry wants the committee to invite other stakeholders, as well, including the Port Authority of Jamaica (PAJ), to answer questions similar to those being sought by JET from the Government.

Government members had no problem with JET being invited to make a presentation, but felt that the issue was not important enough to be included in the current agenda.

Chairman of the committee Edmund Bartlett, on the other hand, thinks that it is important enough to warrant urgent attention from the committee.

On Thursday, as the committee went over the minutes of the previous meeting, the issue arose again, after Henry sought clarification on whether the PAJ would be asked to provide the answers to his questions. The Opposition MP is insisting that there is information which the Port Authority has, based on its discussions with China Harbour Engineering Company (CHEC) on the project, which should be disclosed to the committee.

In the letter to the PAAC chairman seeking the committee's intervention, JET had pointed out that it sought information from the government in November last year, under the Access to Information Act (ATI), but has denied access, hence its decision to seek the assistance of the parliamentarians.

JET sought information from the Government on the proposals submitted by CHEC on the development of the Goat Islands as a transshipment port. However, the agency was told that the documents were exempt from the ATI Act, on grounds that: disclosure would constitute an actionable breach of confidence; premature disclosure would, or could reasonably, be expected to have a substantial effect on the Jamaican economy; and the documents contain information concerning the commercial interests of an organisation, and disclosure of that information would prejudice those interests.

"Jamaica's economy would be affected by the disclosure, if such disclosure breaches the obligations of CHEC and causes them to withdraw from the project," the authorities said.

JET filed an appeal with the Access to Information (ATI) Appeal Tribunal on January 3, but is concerned about the length of that process.[/COLOR]

In the meantime, Opposition MP Gregory Mair has tabled a motion in the House of Representatives to have the matter urgently referred to the Infrastructure and Physical Development Committee of the House. But that motion has not yet be addressed by the House Leader.

Minister of Transport, Works and Housing Dr Omar Davies told the House of Representatives on Tuesday that there is a timeline of six weeks to complete the process and sign an agreement with CHEC.

JET has suggested that the PAAC invite representatives of the Ministry of Transport, Works and Housing, the PAJ, NEPA, the Caribbean Coastal Area Management Foundation and the fisherfolk and other stakeholders in Old Harbour, to make presentations and answer questions on the issues.

Government MPs Mikhael Phillips and Denise Daley believe that there is a political agenda behind the PAAC chairman's insistence on going ahead with the proposals from JET to have them appear before the committee, urgently.

Bartlett said that the committee should not be blocking legitimate requests from local organisations, seeking to raise issue pertaining to the economy. But, Government MP, Fitz Jakckson, claimed that JET's request raised a procedural issue, as it was outside the remit of the PAAC, which should be focusing on the budget and the government's medium term economic programme.

Opposition MP Audley Shaw informed the committee that the Opposition has not said that it opposes the proposed Goats Islands project.

"This has nothing to do with politics," Shaw insisted. "It has to do with the economic development of the country, and we have a duty to take into consideration the concerns of the public."

Bartlett said that having decided that it would invite JET at some stage, there are two issues now before the committee: (1) when the request made by Henry will be dealt with; and, (2) when will JET be invited to make a presentation.

He said that if it is the view of the committee that the two matters should be separated, he has no problem with that but, "the matter has to be taken because it was raised by a member".

Jackson, however, insisted that the request from JET was outside the remit of the PAAC, and breaches the Standing Orders of the House.

Bartlett said he would seek the advice of the Clerk to the Parliament, before the matter is taken any further.

[Sir X]

The Chinese Goat Islands 'offer' is non-negotiable

MARK WIGNALL
Sunday, March 02, 2014

SAMUDA… the slow pace at which key investment projects like the Logistics Hub have been moving thus far is serious cause for concern. MAIR… wants the Government to state clearly how the decision on Goat Islands was arrived

There is more than a bit of wisdom in the saying that one should never stare a gift horse in the mouth.
It is like the poor old farmer way back in the day struggling to plough his half-acre after his mule died and he had no other beast of burden to pull his heavy plough. There he is, killing himself in the heat of the midday sun, trying to plough the field with a garden fork. His neighbour, who owns a huge estate, comes riding up with an old draft horse in tow. "Brownie," he says, "a carry a old horse for yu. I'm sure you can use it."
Old farmer Brown steps over to the horse, opens its mouth, gazes inside then says to the big farmer, "Boss, one a di horse teeth rotten." The big farmer looks at him and shakes his head. "Brownie, if a leave here, a tekking the horse wid mi. Yu want him or not?"
Old farmer Brown is no fool. He sums it up quickly. His options are somewhere between zero and extremely limited. "OK, boss, mi wi tek him."
That is where we are now with the Chinese, who wish to increase the size of their economic footprint in the region, which includes Jamaica.
China is now in full forward gear 21st century empire mode. It is at that stage where the pace of its development makes it bigger than its own borders. Those borders cannot contain the positive momentum, and as its products fill the shelves of shops of all sizes in every corner of the globe, like night after the day, the country must physically make its imprint felt where its products are consumed, but first in the most politically and economically vulnerable corners of the globe.
Mixing the statist political approach in their cities at home with elements of the type of capital accumulation practised in the Western capitalist world, China knows that capital accumulation and physical occupation are the hallmarks of every empire, and it would be foolish for it to walk to the edge of the global springboard and not dive off into the great expanse of ocean. It is simply following the historical motions that drive empires.
Jamaica occupies space in one of the vulnerable corners of the globe. The options we have explored, of seriously factoring in the environmental fallout, are now not a moral imperative that we can place in our non-existent bag of luxury. We do not know if the Goat Islands proposal was more a demand and a grab contingent on the Chinese going ahead with present construction in roads and future FDI promises, or if it was our technocrats/politicians who presented them with the sweet but controversial deal.
At the heart of the Government's thrust towards firming up this deal are the obvious ones of the People's National Party's (PNP's) short-term electoral fortunes and maintaining some semblance of social stability via increased employment. The other is that international capital is not seeing Jamaica as an attractive place for the sorts of new investments that we believe are needed to pull more of our people out of poverty over the next two decades.
Only gear must be full speed ahead
Whatever it was, we are now at the stage that even those with eyes wide shut will have to admit that the Goat Islands project has about a 90 per cent chance of going through. Any other layers to final approval that have been promised are purely cosmetic, designed to tamp down the noisemaking, fanning the fumes emitted by the critics.
Although China's lip service in environmental matters has increased, some of us are of the view that what obtains in some of China's cities, especially the heavy smog in Beijing, is the best indicator of where China wants to take Jamaica as it increases its footprint here.
Others who are more charitable to China's causes believe that the smog in Beijing begins with the disadvantage of the capital being on the edge of the Gobi desert and subject to the remnants of dust storms.
We have been told that under consideration is a coal-fired electricity generating plant and, as expected, the debate on 'clean coal' has been reopened. To that, again I ask, what are our options?
Certainly we did not expect the powering of the Chinese operation on Goat Islands to proceed in similar fashion to the snail's pace we have moving with the 360 megawatt power plant. In addition, any manufacturing entities that will be forming the full build-out of the logistics hub will not want to face the uncertainties as to the price they will be paying for electrical energy.
Will the Chinese seek a special permit to generate a stand-alone electric power grid for the Goat Islands operations and the manufacturing extensions that grow out of reclaimed land all the way back to Old Harbour, or will that grid feed into JPS and then resold to the hub operators at prices that will reflect the complexity of the special arrangements?
Again, I ask, what other options do we have? Zero!
Once we are able to fully assimilate all of that, and we know that the environmental lobby cannot be given any more space by a Government that is under extreme pressure to show its 'business-friendly' side and sell its constituents the 'jobs, jobs' chant, we are halfway there.
I say it is not that those of who had criticised the proposal on environmental factors have bowed. Instead, we have stared at the FDI landscape and, seeing no one else dangling US$1.5 billion but the Chinese, we have yielded to seeing the political imperatives of the moment and the tight economic corner into which we have painted ourselves in the last three decades.
Whether we want to give the Goat Islands investment our blessings or not, it is going ahead. Whether we want to see the Chinese as polluters of the environment or not, their language of expansionism, inherent in empire, suits us at this time because our options are few and, in general, the typical Jamaican is not that sensitive to environmental matters.
Apparently, no other location is suitable to the Chinese
As to whether there were other physical locations more suitable for the sort of operations in the proposal, even that is starting to sound a bit irrelevant.
Mr Gregory Mair, Opposition spokesman on works, has the luxury of not being on the side of the Government benches. He wants the Government to state clearly how the decision on Goat Islands was arrived at, and on what basis were other locations rejected, if any such considerations were made.
To be fair to the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) -- the Bruce Golding-led Administration -- it is on record that the JLP Government thought that there were other locations (or at least one other) for the proposed logistics hub build-out and that Goat Islands should be left out of the picture. That may, in itself, tell us that it was the Chinese who had scouted out and picked the islands as their perfect spot and not us making the specific spot as an offer.
But confusion is added to the pot when the JLP spokesman on investment, industry and commerce, Karl Samuda, says in a recent press release: "The Opposition is not entirely surprised that others in the region have made strides on major development projects involving Chinese investors. The slow pace at which key investment projects like the Logistics Hub have been moving thus far is serious cause for concern. This tells a tale of not only vacillation and incompetence on the part of the Administration, but also of a profound failure to bring key stakeholders into its confidence.
"The tenets of good governance, which require transparent and consultative approaches to policy formulation and project implementation, must be uppermost in the mind of the Administration, but they are not excuses for what is actually the Government's inability to effectively manage and execute. The Government must recognise that Jamaica is not the only investment option available to the Chinese, and must ensure that they are able to take up opportunities while maintaining their accountability to the Jamaican people."
While Samuda agrees broadly that there should be transparency, an unlikely approach as governments all over have been notorious in never delivering on that promise time after time, he seems out of synch with Mair, although he has tactfully not mentioned by name Goat Islands in his release.
Mair wants the Goat Islands matter to be referred to Parliament's Infrastructure and Physical Development Committee, that is, further delayed, while Samuda expresses impatience with the Government and cites Trinidad as one of those countries in the region that is moving full steam ahead with its own Chinese investments in maritime facilities/logistics.
Both men seem to be issuing press releases from their personal anechoic chambers.
Although details of the full development have either not been fully formulated or the details are being denied to the public for obvious reasons (the secretive way large international corporate entities operate when they are in consultation with governments), it appears to us that the Chinese intend to embark on a process of land reclamation in the space between the Goat Islands and mainland Old Harbour.
If that does in fact occur, many of the concerns of the environmentalists will have to be adjusted to make up for a changed landscape that may not be at risk environmentally as first thought. In any event, the lizards will have disappeared.
In a part of Jamaica Environment Trust's (JET's) open letter to the minister of works, the following is stated: "The net benefits to Jamaica of this project remain poorly articulated." That, I think, we can agree on.
JET's letter also states: "If we are going to destroy a significant natural area protected under four different Jamaican laws and two international conventions, it should not be for crumbs."
Question: Since when have Jamaican laws been binding when placed beside the immediate social or economic demands of the Government? In reality laws exist to keep the man at street level in a state of coercive fear. To the class interests that exist at the top of the social pyramid (big business/party politicians), the laws are enacted by them to allow them more space for capital accumulation and added power.
As to the two international conventions, please do not expect that anyone in the PNP Cabinet will be prepared to listen to any outsider eggheads telling us what is best for us.
Where JET's letter states, "... it should not be for crumbs", since when has US$1.5 billion been considered crumbs?
Does the US have a position on Chinese influence in the Caribbean?
Years from now we may yet get to see the reams of diplomatic transmissions flowing between American embassies in the Caribbean and Washington in relation to how the Chinese imprint in 'America's backyard' was being assimilated.
A February 22 Helene Cooper article in the New York Times titled, 'In Japan's drill with the US, a message for Beijing,' starts with: 'CAMP PENDLETON, California — In the early morning along a barren stretch of beach here last week, Japanese soldiers and American Marines practised how to invade and retake an island captured by hostile forces. Memo to Beijing: Be forewarned.'
In speaking to the subject of a few islands (outcropping of rocky terrain) in the East China Sea that both Japan and China claim as their own, the article says, 'In the United States military, commanders are increasingly allied in alarm with Japan over China's flexing of military muscle. Captain James Fanell, director of intelligence and information operations with the United States Pacific Fleet, recently said in San Diego that China was training its forces to be capable of carrying out a "short, sharp" war with Japan in the East China Sea.'
Jamaica may have moved a considerable distance from the days in the 1970s when the PNP's Michael Manley flirted with 'democratic socialism', promised to 'walk to the mountaintop' with Cuba's communist leader Fidel Castro, and would issue inflammatory broadsides against the 'forces of imperialism' (read, the USA).
A lot has changed since those Cold War days when many like me believed the CIA — in response to what the US State Department must have seen as the strengthening of the communist and USSR influence in the Caribbean — was in full spy mode in Jamaica in the months leading up the very violent October 1980 election to ensure the ouster of the Manley-led PNP.
In 1823, US President James Monroe in his annual message to Congress warned European powers not to interfere in the affairs of the Western Hemisphere. What eventually came to be known as the Monroe Doctrine eventually guided the foreign policy of the US in its 'adventures' in countries in the region and further afield, and eventually to George W Bush's policy of 'pre-emptive strike' in dealing with countries deemed 'rogue nations' anyplace on the globe.
I am certain that the strategic eyes of the US must be taking a keen look at China's push in America's part of the world, that is, the Caribbean and Latin America. Based on numerous trajectories drawn by economists and futurists, it is estimated that China will overtake the USA and become the top-performing economy in the world by 2030.
No top-performing economy can maintain its stance at the top without wanting to increase its military footprint. Is it possible that the Chinese may, a few years from now, seek 'permission' from us to dock a military vessel or two at a port in Kingston harbour, or maybe the Goat Islands?
Would the Americans countenance that move? I think not.
observemark@gmail.com

[Sir X]

Chinese Colonists?

Published: Sunday | March 2, 20143 Comments

Ambassador of the People's Republic of China to Jamaica, Dong Xiaojun (right), during a courtesy call with Opposition Spokesman on Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade Edmund Bartlett.-Contributed

Opposition spokesman urges Gov't to beware of deals with China
Gary Spaulding, Senior Gleaner Writer
Opposition Spokesman on Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade Edmund Bartlett is urging the Government to address concerns by some Jamaicans that a heavy Chinese economic infusion into Jamaica could negatively affect the country's sovereignty.
Bartlett described the prevailing suspicion of the Chinese as an age-old discussion on how international aid and investment influence the sovereignty of a nation, whether it tramples on democratic rights of its citizens or allows breathing space to an economically challenged state.
"Certainly, we have come a long way in dealing with similar issues of imperialism and colonialism, cultural penetration, as well as political domination," Bartlett told The Sunday Gleaner.
With China poised to play a pivotal role in the establishment of the logistics hub and the Caymanas Economic Zone, after already driving major infrastructural development, concerns have been raised in the public domain as to whether Jamaica stands to lose much of its sovereignty even if it benefits economically.
According to Bartlett, potent political will is necessary to resist what is not good for the country and to embrace what is of benefit to the people.
"One of the things that we cannot and must not do is to sacrifice self-determination for straight economic good," he asserted.
"I believe that with China's position in the global landscape, it is unavoidable for any country that has the peculiar problems that confront Jamaica, which is in dire need of investment flows, to deal with that country," said Bartlett.
"Not many countries that can are willing to do that sort of an investment arrangement that China is offering," added Bartlett. "So I believe that Jamaica is going to have to chart its way [with China as partner]."
CAUTIOUS OPTIMISM
Bartlett expressed cautious optimism about Jamaica's relationship with China, although he expressed some worry that not everything will work for Jamaica in a way that its Government and people desire.
"But I believe that the skills of diplomacy, which we have had over the years, should guide in terms of making those arrangements which will inure on a balance, strongly in our favour."
The opposition spokesman on foreign affairs argued that an alliance with China is necessary in a world that is now at a different crossroads in its approaches to economic convergence.
He said it was essential that greater focus be given to the developmental value added of foreign affairs and foreign trade issues.
"Every decision-making component must carefully weigh the variables to determine not only the qualitative benefits or feel-good factors, but more especially, measurable quantitative social and economic development benefits in Jamaica."
Added Bartlett: "To this end, Jamaica needs to be significantly more proactive in carefully targeted areas in the international organisations in which we are presented."
Bartlett proffered that it is necessary to carefully examine all situations, in terms of Jamaica's involvement in the international sphere. "This is where the notion of economic logic in the political equation comes in," he said.
He stressed that every Jamaican should be given the opportunity to acquire a better appreciation of the country's role in international affairs.
"The issues must not be seen as being foreign and unrelated to the life of the man in the street," he argued.
"In this regard, there is a need for a better joining up of relations with regard to the areas linked to the economic chain, such as industry, investment, agriculture and finance, as well as social and national security, said Bartlett.
"People," he opined, "understand better if you can relate to these key areas that will make it more meaningful to the average man, and that is the challenge that we will have to deal with.
"So when we ask the prime minister and the minister of foreign affairs to report on their visits overseas, it's part of that process of enabling people to feel that the decisions that we are making in international fora are necessary."
gary.Spaulding@gleanerjm.com

[Sir X]

I am a laborite on this one....mi nuh inna Goat Island.Our constitution doesnt give laws,treaties and opposition voices much weight , or does it ?...it seems so unreal,how can they just ram it with such secrecy down the nations throat.

Wow.

[Lazie]

I see that you're passionate about this project.

[Assasin]

you have to be a labourite to stand up to anything? If you oppose the PNP or question them on an issue you are a labourite? LOL

[Mosiah]

Hold dung and tek weh tactics. I am registering my opposition to how this is being done. Putin Simpson Miller need to do better!