Gutting the NCC is gutting the NCA through the backdoor
#DontPaveParadise writes: For the past month or so, there have been numerous news articles, social posts and widely circulated electronic messages that suggest that the UPM Government is going to bring amendments to the National Conservation Act (NCA) or, without bringing the matter to Parliament, summarily alter Schedule 2 of that Act, which deals with the composition of the National Conservation Council (NCC).
We don’t know for sure yet what the government is thinking about doing because it has largely discussed this in closed-door meetings that may or may not have included some of the largest developers in the Cayman Islands. There have been, however, a number of public statements made by current Cabinet ministers that would suggest it wants to alter the composition of the NCC in one of several critical ways.
We believe in this case that where there’s smoke, there’s fire, and what we’re hearing from our own inside sources is that the UPM is indeed about to change the composition of the NCC in such a way as to make the NCA a virtually useless piece of legislation.
As it currently stands, the NCC consists of 13 voting members. Schedule 2 of the NCA states that of those 13 members, five are to include the director of the environment, the deputy director of research in the Department of Environment, the director of agriculture, the director of planning and a person nominated by the National Trust for the Cayman Islands and appointed by the Cabinet.
The other eight council members are appointed by Cabinet, with the requirement that at least four of them have relevant scientific or technical expertise. Additionally, those eight council members must include one person from each of the historical Cayman Islands districts, which include West Bay, George Town, Bodden Town, North Side, East End and the Sister Islands of Cayman Brac and Little Cayman.
We understand the UPM is considering removing the voting rights of the civil servants on the NCC and removing or diluting the voting power of those with scientific or technical knowledge about matters concerning the environment. This will give political appointees who may know nothing about environmental matters the power to push forward the UPM’s development agenda with little or no regard to the potential impacts on the environment.
The government will try to sell this change as a compromise to amending the NCA, but don’t be fooled by this ploy: gutting the NCC is gutting the NCA through the backdoor.
Since it is the NCC that determines which projects will have or are likely to have a significant impact on the environment and thus require an environmental impact assessment (EIA) before planning approval, a politically appointed council with no scientific or technical expertise could possibly never see the need for another EIA. It could deem that no development has the appropriate conditions for an EIA, or even if it did, never deny approval for a development because of its potential damage to our protected areas or critical habitats.
If this were to happen, the NCC would simply become a rubber-stamping body, and the NCA would become a paper tiger, or worse, a piece of disingenuous legislation that would pave the way for exactly the kinds of environmental damage and species carnage the law was passed to conserve.
The NCA would become a Trojan Horse — something that looks like a gift from the outside, but the rubber stampers inside would unleash an invasion of continued development that would lead to more concrete, a higher population, increasing traffic and degradation of the Caymanian way of life.
What is particularly worrying about this potential change in the composition of the NCC is that there is no need to do it unless there is an agenda — by the Cabinet itself or its financial backers — to develop in a way that is against the spirit of the NCA.
Going back to 2016, when the NCA became fully effective, the NCC has directed refusals of only nine out of more than 11,000 planning applications and in these cases, the proposed developments would have had an obvious significant impact on the environment in general or on protected areas or critical habitats for protected species.
Why, then, does the UPM feel it must act when, quite obviously, the NCA hasn’t hindered the development boom that continues today? What is the necessity of gutting the NCC, a body that has only directed refusals on a small number of proposed projects?
Perhaps we should look at those who are behind those refused projects to see who is really pushing Cabinet to act in such an irresponsible and untransparent way regarding a piece of legislation that took almost 15 years to pass and which had, according to former premier Wayne Panton’s estimation, more public consultation than any bill in the history of the Cayman Islands.
The truth is that the NCA and the NCC have both been functioning exactly as they were intended to function. A select few developers are upset because they didn’t get their way and are now putting pressure on those whom they helped get elected.
Gutting the NCC, and by extension, the NCA, would make it easier for them to make more money by continuing to develop in the Cayman Islands, regardless of the fact that our infrastructure isn’t ready for more development, our people aren’t ready for more development, and what’s remaining of our natural environment won’t be preserved for future generations in the best way possible.
We are not anti-development and we aren’t suggesting that there shouldn’t be any future development in the Cayman Islands. What we’re saying is that all development in the future should be planned and managed better and that the NCA and NCC should continue to legally require other government entities to take into consideration the impacts of development on the environment in cases where it will likely have a significant impact.
Only by doing what the NCA and NCC were designed to do can we ensure that those impacts can either be avoided or mitigated.
We urge every concerned citizen of the Cayman Islands to contact their elected representative to voice their opinion that Cabinet needs to ignore the big developers and leave the NCC and NCA as they are.
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
Category: development, Land Habitat, Local News, Science & Nature, Viewpoint
Next thing is no more grants of Cayman status, and permanent residency will need a million points
Since the politicians claim they are doing this for the people, why are they not consulting the public? Someone else is telling them what to do, they don’t care about Cayman or the people.
We can talk all we want but it’s safe to say the government will get its way. The NCC will be watered down so much that it won’t matter for anything.
The deal is already passed.
It was already watered down significantly to get it passed. We should be enhancing it not watering it down further to the point it becomes meaningless. Truly regressive.
On which other boards do the civil servant members have voting rights?
Is it not a requirement of another law that CS members on boards are advisory only?
If the CS voting rights are removed and the number of voting members with relevant/scientific knowledge increased to 8 from 4, would this not have the required makeup?
The CS members would still be available to give the required advice to a board of mostly persons with relevant experience.
I do not wish for the ability of the NCC to be reduced, but ALL laws should be followed.
11:21 you said it !!
11:21 you are absolutely correct. Voiding civil servants ability to vote would simply bring the NCC in compliance with the Public Authorities Act which, among other things, prohibits civil servants from voting on public authority boards. It is utterly absurd to think that a civil servants should anything more than an advisory role on any government board. Here’s the absurdity- the Director of Planning technically has a vote on the NCC – yet absolutely no vote in his role as Executive Secretary to the CPA. So he could theoretically vote on NCC against a project and then, as Executive Secretary to the CPA give his technical opinion to approve it.
The other nonsense about this “Don’t Pave Paradise” lobby group is that it has no face….who exactly are the people behind this group who expect people to actually sign their names to a petition when they themselves won’t allow themselves to be identified?
There is something hilarious about criticism that #Dont Pave Paradise does not have a face coming from a person who is commenting anonymously!
In fact neither the 11:21 commenter nor yourself is correct. There is no general law that provides that Civil Servants on boards should not have a vote.
There is a provision in the Public Authorities Act that Civil Servants who are ex officio members of the Board of Directors of Statutory are not to have the right to vote on decisions of those boards.
However, this is not of general application. The Public Authorities Act only applies to Statutory Authorities. It does not apply to the NCC or the CPA for example.
The NCA predates the PAA by a number of years so if it was intended to overwrite the NCA it would have made that very clear.
The NCC is a Council that was designed to be different and designed to represent the technical expertise that existed within Government and some outside as well with members from the different general district constituencies as well.
The NCC is also the only Council that is required by law to hold its meetings in public so you know precisely what the views of members are and whether they have voted on a matter and exactly what that vote is. That is transparency.
Wouldnt it be nice if the CPA was held to a similar standard?!
Wouldnt
The facts are the National Conservation Council is not a board of directors for a statutory authority, like CIMA or Cayman Airways, so the Public Authorities Act does not apply here.
And one of the proposed amendments is to remove the requirement for political appointments to the NCC to have any technical expertise, hence the public concern about that these amendments.
2:28 pm you have been brainwashed too. The Public Authorities Act DOES apply and so should common sense. Staff should NOT have a vote on any decision-making board where they provide technical advice. NO a other board in Cayman operates likes this and that is precisely for good governance
sigh… it is NOT a board.
Yup. Cabinet could have done that at any time, like when they reappointed the board last year. If that’s their excuse for needing to change the law, to do something they can do now without changing the law …
Maybe that is what the current division in cabinet is about. A few are inclined to tweak the law by adjusting the board composition and voting rights and others (majority?) want to make major changes.
Deliberately false or at best misguided premise. The NCC is not a statutory board and the Public Authorities Act does not apply
In Cayman, only Bush found in West Bay is protected and allowed to grow wild.
Classic!
One only has to look behind the very few past and future projects affected by this law, and the shady underhand deals with developers and landowners going back decades to understand why they want to gut a law which to the contrary, needs further enhancement. It also explains why the politicians refuse to listen to the people.
Cruise Piers coming to George Town
Cargo going to breakers
Thats the plan
Civil servants have no business voting on this or any committee. Where is the auditor general?
LOL – The auditor general has absolutely nothing to do with this kind of thing. Are you that uninformed or just trying to confuse people because you’re a developer who wants to make boatloads of money?
False flag narrative – the NCC is an advisory body not a statutory board.
This is all about the cruise dock.
The boondoggle that never goes away.
Surely no coincidence Kenny brings up the port the same week they’re trying to gut the NCA
Surely no coincidence that the owners of the land around the new port are all developers.
The cruise dock is part of it, but there’s much, much more. Once the NCC is out of the way, the amount of development that will go on all over the island will make your head spin. Some people will get filthy – and I mean FILTHY – rich, while the rest of us are mired in concrete jungle that will hardly resemble the Cayman Islands of even 25 years ago. Those getting rich won’t care that their legacy is the destruction of the Cayman Islands we once knew because they’ll be so rich, they don’t have to stay here anymore.
Don’t worry Mother Nature will rightfully claim what is hers. Remember the parable only a fool builds on sandy ground. I predict within 10 years seven mile beach will be gone. No matter how much replenishment will occur all will be in vain.
Cruise Dock, EW Arterial, Breakers Port to name just a few.
More of the same tired old rhetoric, even after admitting that you have no idea what is being proposed.
Wrong. There is an idea of what is going on because some of the politicians involved are saying so. Nobody knows the exact details, but when this all comes out, will you be back here admitting those who are ringing out the warning are right? No, I think you’ll be rubbing your hands in glee at all the money you’ll make by more development at the expense of the rest of us.
Wrong. You know nothing.
Neither, I’ll be laughing at your sorry worked up ass.
Time for the Governor to intervene.
While there is still a viable Territory in which to intervene.
Yes, she needs to intervene and make an order in Cabinet to rectify this currently unconstitutional law.
Jane and Julianna have a special kind of close relationship unlike anything previously seen between a Governor and Premier or Leader of Government business.
Jane cannot and will not disagree with her good friend JuJu.
Much like Alden and Roper
Even closer
“Going back to 2016, when the NCA became fully effective, the NCC has directed refusals of only nine out of more than 11,000 planning applications and in these cases, the proposed developments would have had an obvious significant impact on the environment in general or on protected areas or critical habitats for protected species.”
So its been repeatedly said that NCC/DoE can only intervene on proposed development in Marine Protected and Critical Habitat areas. Now I am reading “environment in general”.
Perhaps its time for the media houses to show the full extent of what is in the NCA since spoon-feeding is needed to those who just dont have the time to read it for themselves?
For ease of reference, here is Section 41(3) of the National Conservation Act:
“Every entity shall, in accordance with the guidance notes issued by the Council, consult with the Council and take into account before taking any action including the grant of any permit or licence and the making of any decision or the giving of any undertaking or approval that would or would be likely to have an adverse effect on the environment generally or on any natural resource.”
Just for clarity, it is Section 41(4) that deals with Marine Protected and Critical Habitat areas. Those are the ones continuously highlighted and cited but its clear that many people have not grasped the fact that ‘environment generally’ may cover anywhere and everywhere else, including your own property.
Section 41(3) says “consult and take into account… ”
It does not say “shall be directed by the NCC or the NCA”
That sounds about right. If I understood him correctly I think Mr Panton said less than 1% are affected of which only 0.3% get refused.
This is a rather misleading or ignorant comment as the NCC/DOE do weigh in on many factors that influence, preclude and alter how the CPA deals with applications so they do in fact greatly impact applications other than those that are refused or require EIAs.
Those are recommendations which are usually ignored. Next….
The latest is that 16 of 19 MPS in Parliament support the amendments – all but Andre, Kathy and Wayne.
What a disgrace.
Yup, time for those three to go
yup 8:32 g0 ON BACK To your country. we dont need you nor want you.
I am pretty sure that wasn’t most expats bashing Wayne and Andre, most if not all I know support to them and are keen to see Cayman preserve it’s natural environment, most that is of us who live in and visit Cayman, not the greedy developers however who work alongside equally greedy, well-known “personalities” from local shores too. This is not about nationality it’s about greed and corruption without any thought about sustainability for future generations, and comes at any cost to the natural environment.
If that’s true, then I take back what I said about Kathy and Andre in a previous post and I’ll do what I can to support them.
I don’t think this can be true, seeing as the Cabinet have been doing this behind closed doors, there is no way for the those outside Cabinet to know what the amendments are, let alone whether they support or oppose them. Maybe you mean that those three are against the remainder of Government?
Well, Sir Alldone has already said publicly that he wanted to amend the NCA and Joey Who is in the back pocket of the biggest developer of them all. I doubt the rest of the PPM puppets would go against those two.
LOL … really 5t Floor Cabinet Meeting Room in GAB is like a ole fridge eva a leak !!!
Thank you Andre, Kathy and Wayne.