Bryan: Referendum will be one simple question

(CNS): Tourism Minister Kenneth Bryan has said the referendum recently approved by Cabinet will be a very simple question asking the people whether or not they want the country to build cruise berthing facilities. The vote will not address where such a facility should be built, how it will be financed, whether or not it should include upland development or whether it should involve the cruise lines. These are issues that the next government will need to deal with, Bryan has said.

The current tourism minister said all other questions can begin to be discussed once the country has said yes or no to the development of a berthing facility of any kind. Bryan has implied the question is about whether or not this country continues to cater to cruise tourism because without a pier of some kind, larger ships will stop coming.

Speaking recently on Radio Cayman, he claimed this is already having a detrimental impact on the wider economy and government coffers. Bryan has promised that before the vote, expected to be in October or November, he will present the country with a proper economic analysis of what it means if Cayman decides it doesn’t want cruise dock facilities of any kind and what action future governments will need to take to help transition those dependent on the sector to cater to overnight guests.

It is clear, however, that the tourism minister is hoping that by asking such a simple question and implying that the project could be a very basic dock with no upland development and minimal environmental damage, people are more likely to vote ‘yes’. But if the voters do that, they will be doing so without any indication of what could happen after the vote.

If the people were to support the principle of a ‘basic dock’, if that even proves to be possible, a future government could, without a referendum, move toward a major elaborate project with partners that don’t have this jurisdiction’s best interests at heart. Such a project might only benefit a handful of harbourfront merchants and some larger tour operators, as was the case with the PPM administration’s proposal.

However, Bryan said he thinks the discussions around what comes next cannot happen before people answer a simple yes or no to the principle of cruise infrastructure.

“We need to have an answer about one thing. Let’s not get bogged down with the cost, the location, the design and all the other things. Let’s just find out from the people do you want a pier,” he said, explaining how he and his team and caucus concluded that a simple question is the best way forward in the first instance.

Bryan claimed that Grand Cayman could have just one simple pier because it does not need to have more than two mega ships at a time. So he wants to know how people feel about the basic idea first. If the people want it, then the next government can begin considering the other array of issues, especially the financing and the environment. He said a simple single pier could be financed through a Caymanian-only investment fund.

Bryan appears convinced now that the cruise lines are already dramatically reducing the calls here and that eventually the main lines will stop altogether and if that is the case and that’s what the people want government will need to make plans.

“One of the main things about this referendum is once you have a decision, whichever way it is, the government can plan,” he said. “It may be a sensitive area but we have to talk about it because if the answer is no, which is the people’s right to choose, then at least the next administration will know that the people don’t want that and what are you going to do when the numbers continue to decline.”

The tourism minister spoke about the need to review immigration policies and perhaps even a moratorium on work permits in the tourism sector until local people working in it and local small business owners servicing the cruise sector transition into the stay-over market if cruise is something Cayman is going to exit.

There are many people in Cayman already in the tourism industry who have said for some time that there is little benefit to the wider population from the cruise sector. Stay-over tourism also has its critics, given the changing shape of the market, with the rise of Airbnb, and the impact it can have on the environment and infrastructure.

However, it still has more to offer the local economy than the cruise sector, which is being driven more and more by mega ships and companies that are doing everything they can to make ports of call nothing more than changing backdrops to the ‘onboard destination’ they are selling.

Meanwhile, merchants with the most to gain from a pier have begun weighing in on the argument, trying to persuade the rest of the country to support berthing facilities to help their profits. In a press release on Monday, local liquor store and famous cake maker, Tortuga Rum Company, welcomed the decision by the government to hold the national ballot.

“The enhancement of our cruise port is not just about infrastructure; it is about securing the future of our economy and preserving the jobs and businesses that depend on cruise tourism,” said Eugene Nolan, CEO of Tortuga Rum Company, suggesting that many of those who work in tourism directly benefit from cruise — an issue that is hotly disputed.

“The significant decline in cruise passenger arrivals since the reopening of Cayman’s borders following the pandemic, with no signs of a full rebound, underscores the importance of this topic,” he said, claiming that the “benefits of a cruise berthing facility extend far beyond the immediate economic impact”.

However, those campaigning against the idea of a dock point out that the negative impacts of cruise far outweigh what is seen as a very limited benefit to Caymanians.

“Investment in the enhancement of our cruise tourism facilities would ensure that the Cayman Islands remain a premier destination for cruise tourists, which in turn supports local businesses, from watersports and tour operators to restaurants and retailers across the island,” Nolan said, adding that his bosses believe the development of a cruise port “is essential for the future prosperity of our islands”, a claim that is vehemently disputed.

---