Last night, the Department of Environment hosted an extended public consultation to hear citizens' views on the resubmission of the Environmental and Social Impact Assessment for the mega-development that Waterloo and the Port of Belize want to make.
As we told you, this developer has floated the idea of a Cargo Expansion and the Construction of a Cruise Terminal & Cruise Tourism Village right on the property of the Port of Belize. If environmental approval is given, this would be the third major cruise tourism project that the National Environmental Appraisal Committee has given the nod. But, as viewers are aware, Waterloo and PBL had to return to the EIA phase because the NEAC rejected their project last year.
So, with a grassroots movement attempting to block the proposal and a referendum petition attempt from the community -led by vested interests - the developers tried to make their sales pitch to a tough crowd last night at the Biltmore Plaza Hotel.
The public consultation lasted for 4 hours and 20 minutes, and Daniel Ortiz was there. Here's his full report on a few of the highlights of the heated debate:
Last night's public consultation on the proposed Port of Belize/Waterloo investment drew a diverse crowd of participants and attendees at the Biltmore.
There were those who came to listen attentively with an open mind and those who had already decided that the project should succeed or fail.
Some of the Port's own employees, the stevedores, came specifically to offer objections. But, there also appeared to be a few pockets of supporters who spent the night in verbal scuffles with representatives of the referendum petitioners who want to block the proposed development using a national referendum.
Those petitioners wore this "Ashcroft The White Devil" t-shirt, and during the back and forth between these two groups, insults were hurled left and right that the other side's support for - or opposition to - the project was bought and paid for.
And, caught in the middle of all of this were the members of the head table, the experts representing Waterloo/Port of Belize. They had a very tough task of explaining the features of the proposed development. Those experts had to proceed at times through loud jeers and impolite retorts from the audience.
Andy Lane - CEO, PBL/Cargo Port Logistics Consultant
"As we stand right here, we do not necessarily see a logical or rational alternative to expanding the Port of Belize. Belize, as a country, will need to continue to trade. We must preserve our commercial activity, primarily in the Port Loyola Belize City District. The expansion produces - the expansion that we're proposing here potentially produces the least environmentally damaging outcome of any of the alternatives."
Allan Herrera - Local Environmental Consultant, Nextera
"And the people who are working there, the people from the government, when they get there, they feel comfortable. They're productive, and the Belizean people - They're comfortable. So, these investments, they make the port facility a nicer place for everybody. It provides much-needed economic boosts through direct and indirect employment and demands for goods and services. An improved port will promote growth in key sectors such as agriculture and mining, among others, better access to foreign markets for domestic firms, and less transport costs on goods for Belizean customers."
The topic which seemed to generate the most interest from the audience was the acknowledgment from the experts that - without the proper mitigation measures - this project could harm the environment.
Allan Herrera
"On the terrestrial side, as I mentioned, the area is already heavily disturbed. So, there are no habitats of significant value that we encountered during the surveys. On the marine side, potential impacts would be increased turbidity in the water column, which may affect marine life and potential damage to habitats during dredging. That's a potential impact. You would also, in terms of waste generation, the potential for contamination of land and marine environment from waste generation.
- Threat to marine animals due to ingestion,
- Potential for attraction of feral animals and disease due to improperly managed waste.
- On the Liquid Waste Generation side
- Potential to contaminate soils and water with nutrient-enriched pollutants,
- Potential to produce disease-causing vectors due to poorly treated discharged water,
- Noise
- Miss Dionne just mentioned the people in the area are concerned about noise. So that's another issue.
- And also from Dust,
- Because they will be handling a lot of material, both native material from the site and material that is brought in from outside
- And then, of course, you will have some Fuel Storage because it is a big development project.
Those potential environmental impacts also featured prominently in the questions that the head table had to answer from the attendees.
Sharon Pitts - Super Patriot
"You're present-proofing, and you're future-proofing your development. We, Belizeans, need to answer every one of our children about how we will present-proof and future-proof our reef as our heritage."
Luis Prieto y Munoz - Representative, Piedroba Consulting Group
"We agree with an enormous amount of what you said, and we absolutely stand by the fact that the Belize Barrier Reef needs to be absolutely protected. And every step that we've taken in this project planning is toward that end. But, we also believe that the steps we taking toward this project are going to safeguard Belize's greener future and create infrastructure and create jobs that would not otherwise exist in that area. So, I completely appreciate the passion, and I completely understand why you feel as passionate as you do. It's an incredible asset, and we, without question, have put in every resource we can to ensure that, unequivocally, nothing will happen to the Belize Barrier Reef."
Daniel Ortiz
"The nearshore disposal of some of the dredged materials. Can you 100% guarantee that there will be no contamination of the water column?"
Luis Prieto y Munoz
"The first thing I will point out, the material that we're putting there, is - a lot has been made of it being toxic. It is not toxic. This material has been widely studied. All of those studies have been included in depth in the EIA, in the annexes of it, and you can look at the composition of that material and see that all of these material samples that we have qualify for off-shore placement in some of the most stringent jurisdictions in the world: Canada, the UK, [and] the US. So, all of the chemical concentrations, which exists, of course, in every subsoil, are way below the thresholds for off-shore placement. So, this material has never been touched that we're moving. This is not some sludge, as it has been called. This is coming from the first and second layers of material that's in the port now, which has never been dredged."
Jose Uk Espat - Consultation Attendee
"What makes you any different? How can you guarantee these young people, not just jobs, while your project is ongoing? How can you guarantee our Belizeans long-term sustainability?"
The Port Loyola Area Representative, Gilroy Usher Sr., also chimed into the discussion with an endorsement of the project.
Gilroy Usher Sr - PUP Area Rep., Port Loyola
"I am not speaking on behalf of the Government. I'm speaking as the Area Representative for Port Loyola."
And while Gilroy Usher Sr. supports it, Gary Simonyan, the son-in-law of Mike Feinstein, the rival developer behind Port Coral, went to the public consultation to tell PBL/Waterloo that Belize City doesn't need their development because Port Coral exists.
Gary Simonyan - Consultation Attendee
"How long will it take for you to build this port?"
Luis Prieto y Munoz
"Depending on when the approval is, we expect about 18 to 24 months of construction."
Gary Simonyan
"I think that will probably be never, sir. I'd like to make it crystal clear. There already is a project being completed, Port Coral, in the next few months. It 100% has a causeway, approved and permitted to be built from Port Coral to the Drowned Caye Development and from Drowned Caye to the City. The entire purpose and basis of your project with needing a land-based approach for disembarking oasis-class ships - and I do agree. It is safer - and come to Belize and enjoy all of the tourism here already exists, sir. The purpose of your cruise port project has nothing to do with cruise tourism. It has to do with something else. The cargo port has had 15 years in receivership to get upgraded. It's interesting how today is when they choose to do this. So, I want to make it crystal clear. That causeway already exists and is on the construction calendar, sir, and is going to be built. So, the cruise tourists - all of the cruise tourists - will be able to disembark safely. When I look around here, I see a room full of Belizeans. I am a Belizean myself. Don't let the accent fool you. Do you know who I don't see? Mr. Munoz, could you point out Mr. Ashcroft for me or his son? He has never been to a consultation. I see competitors here. I don't see Mr. Ashcroft at any of these things. He doesn't care enough for Belize to be present, or this project, to be here personally."
But, one of the most significant exchanges of the night was back and forth between the Port's CEO, Andrew Lane, and the President of the Christian Workers Union. One of the talking points of the sales pitch for this project is that it will supposedly generate 2,500 jobs.
Evan "Mose" Hyde - President, Christian Workers Union
"In Belize, we have a saying, seeing me and living with me are two different things. I am president of the Christian Workers Union, and I believe that tonight has been more about jobs than about the reef. So, my question is about the relationship with the people who will do the jobs. Now in the case of Waterloo/PBL, you guys are not a newcomer. You have workers. You have employees, and I have had the honor of representing those employees. Since then, we have had three major confrontations down at the waterfront. We are presently, in fact, in a couple of days, you and I will be in court. We'll be in court, Mr. Lane, because you are - and the organization - not you personally. But Waterloo/PBL took it upon themselves to take up a side legally, with resources, to prevent one and a half million dollars from reaching your own employees. I want to know how it is that we're going to trans - just completely transform that energy because, I think you would concede, it is a very toxic relationship we've had. How are we gonna transform that now, then, miraculously? Because I cannot understand how a minister of government can get up on this microphone and say that they're gonna support a project 500%. I can't understand because it is one thing. It is one thing to say that you support this project in principle, but you'd have to at least add, I support this project in principle, but you guys will have to do better with your workers. You will have to do better by the union. You'd have to do that!"
Andy Lane - CEO, PBL
"A lot of what you say is, of course - these are correct things that have happened in the past. They probably shouldn't have happened. I do acknowledge that the relationship of the past, essentially going all the way back to 2004 - I believe it was - could have been a lot better. It's very regrettable of the various different things that have happened along the way. I thank you very much for recognizing that you have at least seen some positive change since I've been here. My strong belief - and I think we have shared opinions here - is that we want to have happy employees. And my personal belief, Mr. Hyde, in working with you as I have done for the last 18 months, I think you and I can achieve this. I think we've already had some achievements in that time. I would very much believe that the experience of our existing staff and our future staff is going to be significantly better than it ever has been in the past."
The DOE officer who helped moderate last night's public consultation told the attendees that tentatively, the NEAC would meet on September 19, 2022, to review this project. Citizens with comments and concerns about the project can submit their views via a public comment form available on the DOE's Facebook page. The deadline for the submission of those views is September 14.
