Got TIPS or BREAKING NEWS? Please call 1-284-442-8000 direct/can also WhatsApp same number or Email ALL news to:newsvino@outlook.com;                               ads call 1-284-440-6666

"Done deal” on airport expansion may need to be reassessed - Fraser

Hon. Pickering at one of the meetings where he gave details about the airport expansion project. Photo: VINO
Hon. Fraser opined that the Minister should reconsider his statement.
Hon. Fraser opined that the Minister should reconsider his statement.
Option 4 (above) and 6 of the airport's expansion. Photo: VINO
Option 4 (above) and 6 of the airport's expansion. Photo: VINO
ROAD TOWN, Tortola, VI - Hon. Kedrick Pickering, Minister for Natural Resources and Labour, may need to re-evaluate his statement about the Terrance B. Lettsome International Airport expansion being a done deal, while in the same breath has informed the public that Government will do nothing until the completion of an environmental impact assessment study.

This is the view of former Minister for Communications and Works and 3rd District Representative, Julian Fraser RA in an interview with this news agency on Monday, April 2, 2012. The operation of all airports in the Virgin Islands was under his portfolio.

Hon. Pickering on March 27, 2012 at the East End/Long Look Community Centre had announced that the Government of the day campaigned about the whole question of the upgrade and expansion of the TB Lettsome International Airport. "We have made a decision that we are going to expand the airport. That decision is made. I didn't come here to ask if we are going to expand the airport...We have to do other research on how we are going to do it. Kraus-Manning, the firm hired to execute the environmental impact, is scheduled to give its report which will be submitted to the BVIAA (BVI Airports Authority) by the end of April.”

When asked if he believes that Hon. Pickering may be contradicting himself, the District Representative stated, “I never heard it put that way before, that the decision is taken. I think he may want to reconsider his words when he says the decision was taken. But I know that his Government, himself in particular is keen on having something done about airlift into the Territory. No more so than we were, I will wait and see what take place.”

Giving a brief overview of how the airport expansion materialised, the former Communications and Works Minister explained the concept began under the current Government’s leadership when they first took office in 2003 through 2007.

“...and when I got there I met a study in progress and I continued it. The environmental impact assessment they are waiting for is something I commissioned a few weeks before we [the Virgin Islands Party] left office. And I was shocked myself when I heard the Minister saying that the decision had already been taken,” Hon. Fraser revealed.

Two town hall meetings were held to get the feedback from the public on their views on the expansion.

You lose to gain

Meanwhile, Territorial At Large representative, Hon. Archibald Christian during NDP Radio on April 2, 2012 said that in any major development in a country “sometimes you have to lose certain things to gain”.

“When the existing airport present alignment was being extended, Conch Shell Point, which was a locally owned business by a local family was given up…was lost,” he declared.

Christian, who was present at both meetings, said he was struck by what his colleague, Hon. Pickering had said about Conch Shell Point. “…and I believe people need to remember that, our history will show in the past we have given up a lot to get more and that was part of the meeting that stuck with me.”

He also reiterated the point that Government will have to be guided by the information from Kraus-Manning, the firm hired to conduct the environmental impact assessment study.

The reaction has been mixed about the airport project with proprietors of Trellis Bay and Last Resort expressing concern that their businesses will be adversely affected.

14 Responses to “"Done deal” on airport expansion may need to be reassessed - Fraser ”

  • ausar (05/04/2012, 09:29) Like (0) Dislike (0) Reply
    PUH LEEZE! Frazer should be the last one talking! Didn't he build the "Great Wall of China a la Sea Cow's Bay" without the input from the people? How about the traffic lights at the Round- About? Was the people consulted on that? How about the "island" in the East? It seems to me it's another case of pot calling the kettle black! Sadly, in this case his pot, is a bit more blacker than the kettle.
    • ice cream (05/04/2012, 09:54) Like (0) Dislike (0) Reply
      very good point Frazer oh how we miss you from office, but you will be back. Please keep asking the tuff and senable questions Mr. frazer
    • Poor You (06/04/2012, 13:13) Like (0) Dislike (0) Reply
      "Ausar", or A$$ Hole depends on how you look at it. You hate Frazer so much that you didn't even read the article to see what he said, you Just wanted to criticize. As far as I See it he is not being critical at all, he seem simply to be pointing out, that the minister in saying it is a done deal, that coming to the public is just a formality. So even if that is the case, the public didn't have to know that. I guess given Frazer's experience, he is merely pointing out to the Minister, that a better strategy would have been not to tell the public that the decision to expand was already taken by the Government.
      • Realist (06/04/2012, 18:12) Like (0) Dislike (0) Reply
        "Poor You"... Before you jump down Ausar's throat, you need to realize that Pickering is talking about a strategic decision. The lower level decisions are not yet made. These will be made after the studies are completed. http://www.managementstudyguide.com/strategic-decisions.htm Pickering clearly said that the other strategic alternatives 1) Do nothing, and 2) Rely on another territory (St. Thomas) are not viable in the long term for a developing and sovereign territory. All due respect to Fraser, but I believe he has lost all credibility as a politician at the territorial level. When he was the Minister, he put his district above the priorities of the wider territory. And when he did make territorial decisions, he did not consult with (or listen to) anyone who had a different view. So now I believe he should just speak (or criticize) at the district level (district 3). I believe the leader of the opposition is the one who should have been interviewed on this matter.
        • Let the music Play (07/04/2012, 10:06) Like (0) Dislike (0) Reply
          Your comment about Fraser not listening is all about listening to the NDP for what they wanted for their cronies. But tell me what Fraser did before having the approval of his colleagues in Cabinet. But to the point of him taking decisions. That is exactly what this country lacks, leaders who are not afraid to make a decision. At least with Fraser you know he is going to act. And naturally, some people (like you) will not be satisfied, but that is the problem, you can't please everyone. One thing about Fraser, he believes in the greater good, and if it means someone will not be pleased, and the masses will be, then so be it. Your position that the Leaderof the Opposition should be the one commenting on the airport project, and not Fraser is ludicrous, since when Fraser needs a spokesman? He is a Member of he House of Assembly like everyone else. So you better respect his right to an opinion.
          • Realist (09/04/2012, 22:00) Like (0) Dislike (0) Reply
            On your last paragraph: Ralph was the Premier and was not directly in charge of capital projects...but he was still accountable. Also he would have had a broader perspective on the airport issue. He should be able to give a more objective view (if that is possible). Yes Fraser has a right to an opinion. But he doesnt come across good in light of his own past actions.
  • two cents (05/04/2012, 16:29) Like (0) Dislike (0) Reply
    we need we airport bigger end of story
  • positive vision (05/04/2012, 18:23) Like (0) Dislike (0) Reply
    SERIOUS THING ,GET DOWN WITH THE DEAL AND LET GET TO ACTION RIGHT AWAY BEFORE THE NEXT FOR YEARS.
  • taxpayer (06/04/2012, 00:16) Like (0) Dislike (0) Reply
    Why are we comparing Conch Shell Restaurante and the Last Resort. The former restaurante was operated on government owned land and in a Government building. The Last Resort sits on private property: quite different. But why are we getting heart burn over this proposed development, when at the end of the day, this proposal will end up in the history books as nothing more than an ego trip into fantasy land.
  • Fact (06/04/2012, 10:46) Like (0) Dislike (0) Reply
    If truth be known about Conch Shell, no one would be here mentioning it today. Truth is owners of Conch Shell were compensated for the business, and handsomely I might add. The owners waited untill the time came to leave to claim they were not adequately informed so they were unable to execute their plans. There plans were, as discussed and agreed with government, was to rebuild the business elsewhere. Failing to have accomplish that when the time came to leave, government further extended the time so they could relocate. They have to this date yet to do so. What are we to make of that?
  • Blind Man (06/04/2012, 10:50) Like (0) Dislike (0) Reply
    Option 6 ( bottom ) Trellis Bay DEAD
  • @@@@ (06/04/2012, 16:00) Like (0) Dislike (0) Reply
    a lot of recycled people up there with Dr. Pic....that fat one did we not get him out of the college???
    • killer (06/04/2012, 17:58) Like (0) Dislike (0) Reply
      you can never get rid of them if they have a wh... face...remember the NDP love these wh... people
      • Really (06/04/2012, 21:05) Like (0) Dislike (0) Reply
        Really love the racist comments. BVI has worse problems than an airport expansion.


Create a comment


Create a comment

Disclaimer: Virgin Islands News Online (VINO) welcomes your thoughts, feedback, views, bloggs and opinions. However, by posting a blogg you are agreeing to post comments or bloggs that are relevant to the topic, and that are not defamatory, liable, obscene, racist, abusive, sexist, anti-Semitic, threatening, hateful or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be excluded permanently from making contributions. Please view our declaimer above this article. We thank you in advance for complying with VINO's policy.

Follow Us On

Disclaimer: All comments posted on Virgin Islands News Online (VINO) are the sole views and opinions of the commentators and or bloggers and do not in anyway represent the views and opinions of the Board of Directors, Management and Staff of Virgin Islands News Online and its parent company.