Every time the tragic situation in Canouan is brought up, a small group, enthralled by glitz, glitter, and the allure of a rich bounty, is quick to remind us that the foreign developers invested hundreds of millions of dollars and must now be allowed to reap the benefits of their foresight.
The fact that the government gave away 1,200 acres of prime, unspoiled real estate in the peaceful seas of the Grenadines to foreign developers is lost in the argument over Canouan.
In order to establish SVG as a high-end tourism destination, James Mitchell’s NDP administration leased the northern two-thirds of Canouan to a company called Canouan Resorts Development Ltd. in 1990. Canouan is made up of about 1,800 acres of land. Mitchell’s administration leased 1,200 acres for tourism development.
The developers paid no taxes for the first 15 years. This is common procedure in these types of development transactions. What was not usual, and has never been standard anyplace in the world, was the government’s decision to enable the lessee, who had negotiated a 99-year lease, to sell freeholds out of the leasehold.
It is plausible and probably likely that when the lease expires in 2089, all 1,200 acres of land will be developed and sold. There will be nothing left to return to our patrimony. For this sweetheart bargain, the developers paid $10,000 in annual rent beginning in 1996, and the annual price will be $55,599.17 in the final year of the lease in 2089.
We’ve basically handed away a fortune. In 2015, the government sold 40 acres of land on Canouan to the same developers for $20,000,000. According to a reliable source, an acre was sold to a wealthy Englishman for 9 million pounds roughly 15 years ago. These speculators are making a fortune by selling lands that they have leased. This cannot be correct. This can’t be right. The lease is either null and void or is voidable. Our inheritance requires us to contest the agreement’s legitimacy. Once it is determined to be illegal, we may renegotiate more favorable terms for the people of SVG.
Follow this discussion and keep in mind that the 1,200 acres of land belong to the people of St Vincent and the Grenadines. Understand that, despite the fact that the land is owned by the Crown and has been leased from the government for 99 years, the Canouan Resorts Development Ltd. owners can sell sections of it. The government receives a meager 17% of whatever fee our land is sold for.
This lease agreement is especially noteworthy because it was not just registered. The Canouan Resorts Ltd. (Lease Ratification) Act was enacted into St. Vincent and the Grenadines legislation as Act # 4 of 1990. Make no mistake: our people are on the “shitty” end of the stick in this situation. To abrogate the sell-out agreement, a courageous people-centered government will be required. If you feel that foreign investors have more rights than SVG citizens, you are mistaken.
There is no doubt that SVG required foreign direct investment in 1990, as well as in 2023. There is no doubt that greater job opportunities are required. However, no self-respecting citizen could/should/would agree to a deal that trades a large chunk of a beautiful island for baubles under the guise of development.
As a result, it is difficult to grasp or comprehend how the discourse in SVG is whether we support or oppose the protest action about beach access. Plain Talk is sure that access is not a problem. All of our beaches are accessible under our laws. We understand that developers want exclusivity. They seek to target a specific audience and provide them with complete privacy. Allow them to pay a high price for seclusion. Build the much-needed jetty and collect a tidy sum.
Similar battles raged over passage via private grounds to Young Island, Breakers Bay, Indian Bay, and Canash. Locals must never relinquish their rights. Governments must never arbitrarily negotiate away citizens’ rights to access beaches. Nationals, on the other hand, must never renounce the spirit of compromise if they stand to prosper.
The challenges of Canouan are not just the responsibility of the island’s people and developers. This is an issue that should concern all of us. Furthermore, the problem extends far beyond beach access. This debate revolves around how we can renegotiate the transaction that hands away great real estate for “twenty pieces of silver.”
Some may claim that when the contract was struck in 1990, Canouan was a mosquito-infested island with little commercial potential. Aside from the slur on the island’s inhabitants, there is something we should know about land. It never spoils and rarely loses value in these sections.
Former Prime Minister Mitchell is well aware of this. He has a family connection to a Grenadine island. We are positive that he did not and would not consider leasing that island and granting the lessee the ability to sell freeholds.
One cannot give what one does not have under law. As a result, this agreement is legally unenforceable. True, it has the support of a Parliamentary Act, but governments enact and repeal laws all the time. Furthermore, any arrangement exempting it from any provision of the Constitution is presumed to be unconstitutional.
Millions of dollars have already been invested, and this could be a difficult road to go. However, legal minds can be brought to bear on this matter. We gave away a valuable item. The question is whether we can recover something or everything through legal means. We certainly gave up much too much. James Mitchell deserves to be punished for giving away Canouan. Gonsalves is 23 times as responsible. He prides himself on being progressive, anti-colonialist, and anti-imperialist. Despite this, he facilitates and maintains the sale of Canouan rather than protecting our people and nation after 23 years in power. According to Fidel Castro, “some politicians enjoy sucking on the honeycomb of power.”
This is how the Canouan argument should be framed, not whether nationals should have access to the beaches. We must rekindle the fight for genuine independence, people’s ownership, and control.
This somewhat amended post first appeared on June 10, 2016, under the title “Beach and Land.”
