Latest update June 13th, 2026 12:40 AM
THE BRIDGE THAT WAS NEVER FORMALLY OPENED
The People’s Progressive Party, PPP, is sixty years old. It has held office over this period just as long as it has been out of power. The problems that it has faced while governing have been many but the party can still take immense pride in what it has achieved in and out of office. And it can do so without discounting the contributions of others who also paid as high a price as the PPP during the many years of struggle.
As the PPP looks back on the sixty years it has been in existence, it should take satisfaction not only of its record when it was in opposition, but also of the many accomplishments that it achieved while holding political power.
And of the main accomplishments would be the construction of the Berbice River Bridge. The PPP had promised a bridge to the people of Berbice after the 1992 elections but the bridge was not completed until one year ago.
A number of developments conspired to ensure that the bridge was not constructed as planned. In 1997, the bridge became a major campaign issue but again was put on the backburner until just before the 2006 elections when the contract was formally signed.
The bridge was finally open to traffic on December 23, 2008 and a formal opening was planned for later when the access roads would have been fully completed. There has not been a formal opening as yet.
Despite the services that it has been providing since its opening, there have, unfortunately, been a great deal of misunderstanding over the location of that bridge, leading to the unsubstantiated claim that the Bridge was placed where it is in order to deny the people of New Amsterdam, the privilege of the bridge being located there.
Well, there was never any option for the Bridge to be constructed at New Amsterdam. One of the original options for the Bridge was for it to be built at a narrower crossing upriver near Everton. In the end the De Edward site was determined to be the most feasible site. This decision immediately led to the charges that the choice of location was intended to deny New Amsterdam, a predominantly African town, the benefits that would flow from the bridge.
Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact the bridge on the eastern side is a mere two and one half kilometers away from the town and thus is far nearer than the original location which would have been many more miles away from New Amsterdam.
There is a logical and sound reason why the bridge could not have been located elsewhere. To have, for example, located the bridge nearer to Everton would have entailed the construction of miles of roadways at a cost of hundreds of millions of US dollars. Given the projected traffic, this would not have been a financially feasible option.
At the present location, there is no need to build miles upon miles of new highways to link the bridge to the existing network on both sides.
It also made sense for the bridge to have been built at De Edward since it would save commuters considerable time. If the authorities had gone ahead with the original location, it would have meant that commuters on both sides would have had to divert for miles to reach the bridge, something that would have increased the travel time between Georgetown and New Amsterdam.
Cost was also a significant factor. It made no sense to have changed the original design of the bridge from one that spanned the river to one that is floating and still at the same time, have to spend more than the cost of the bridge on roads. This makes no financial and economic sense.
The sensitivity which this issue evoked is however something that the ruling party should take note of. Sometime ago, I think, a group had called for ethnic impact assessments for all policies. The intention was to examine the impact of various ethnic groups of specific policies since it was recognized that we live in a politically charged atmosphere in which the slightest misperception or misunderstanding of something leads to charges of ethnic discrimination.
However well- intentioned a policy, there is always that risk because of the narratives through which they are viewed for claims of ethnic discrimination and marginalization.
The people of New Amsterdam will benefit more from the bridge at its present location than had it been located upriver. For it is most likely that given its close proximity to the bridge, that the town would benefit more than had it been located further upstream.
Share this:
Discover more from Kaieteur News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.