In the name of development

Mar 17, 2024 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

Kaieteur News – Concerning the proposed construction of the hotel on Carifesta Avenue, we must avoid being lured into the trap which Jagdeo has laid for his government’s critics.  He is attempting to reframe an argument about the encroachment on a green zone to one that states that there is opposition to investment.

The issue is not about anti-investment sentiments but about protecting green spaces. But by attempting to deflect criticism of the government usurpation of green spaces, Jagdeo is trying to project the criticisms as being anti-development.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Protection of green spaces isn’t solely about halting development; rather, it’s about fostering sustainable and holistic development. Green spaces play a crucial role in enhancing urban resilience, mitigating climate change impacts, promoting biodiversity, and improving the overall quality of life for communities.

People must wake up in the morning to the chirping of birds and go to be bed at nights to the sounds of crickets. Our people must have places for recreation, sport and leisure.

Preserving green spaces doesn’t hinder development but rather encourages a balanced approach. Such an approach considers the long-term ecological, social, and economic well-being of society. Therefore, framing the protection of green spaces as anti-development overlooks the integral role these areas play in fostering genuine and sustainable progress.

Jagdeo has laid the trap and persons are falling for it There has been, for example,  the view expressed that hotels are not necessarily good for Guyana since it reduces our citizens to third-class citizens. It is said that the jobs that hotels offer to locals are usually low-level menial jobs such as waiters, cleaners and cooks. This too is a simplistic and narrow view of the benefits of hotels and by extension tourism. It mirrors but does not equate to what Burnham once said.

Forbes Burnham was once asked why Guyana was not encouraging tourism. The reasons he gave for not encouraging tourism were fundamentally ideological. He said that at the time tourism was not good for Guyana at that time since it meant the importation of false and wrong values – by that he probably meant western values – and the creation of a nation of waiters.

He went on to state that tourism would be okay after the country had built its own economy and its own mores. This was essentially an ideological position which is far distinct from the position which is being offered today that the jobs which hotels provide for locals are predominantly of a menial nature.

The jobs offered within the hotels are usually of this nature but this looks rather narrowly at the benefits of tourism as a whole. There are wider benefits of tourism such as its contribution to food production, the transportation and logistics, to the growth of the construction sector – including jobs for architects, engineers, electricians and managers. It supports small businesses, including craft businesses and provides incentives for the development of communities and places of interests since tourists don’t want to be holed up in a hotel. This diversity of tourism activities often leads to a multiplier effect, where each tourist dollar spent circulates through the community, benefiting various sectors and individuals.

You just need to look at what happens in Guyana when there is a major event such as CPL cricket or international motor racing. Not only are the hotels booked fully but also the restaurants and other places do brisk business. Without tourism, the local nightclubs and bars and restaurants suffer. How many Guyanese can really afford to go to dinner once a week? Or to visit the bars and nightclubs every week?

Tourism is a major global industry. It constitutes 10% of the global economy. We ignore the benefits of tourism to our own detriment. As such we need to dispel this image of tourism as turning our nation into waiters, maids and cook, and instead examine the wider effects of tourism on the country’s economy.

But in the context of the proposed construction of the hotel along Carifesta Avenue we must not lose focus on what is the central issue at stake. It is not about investment but about the appropriation of green spaces.

On a wider scale, it is about the lack of proper urban planning and almost total absence of zoning in our country. The city is a mess and it is not healthy for even tourism considering that urban planning is now haphazard. Businesses are propping up in all of the wards of the city, crowding out housing development and leading to huge increases in real estate values. This may be good for the bourgeois class which is buying up the available real estate but it is not good for the young married couple or the students coming from the countryside seeking places to rent.. It is good for landlords not for potential tenants.

When you add to that the disappearance of green spaces – including spaces which now allow for the creation of boulevards, then what we have is a toxic mix. The quality of life of citizens is affected, and unfortunately that is being done in the name of development.

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of this newspaper and its affiliates.)

---

• Carifesta Avenue, climate, Development, Peeping Tom, spaces

---