Author Archives:

At Last! A Patroness For The Protection Of Our Built Heritage

Dr. Cecile La Grenade

Governor General, Dr. Cecile La Grenade – Source: Caribbeanlifenews.com/GoG

Written by Norris Mitchell – The Willie Redhead Foundation

It was like a breath of fresh air, hearing Her Excellency – Dr. Cecile La Grenade, our new Governor General, in her inaugural address on Tuesday May 7, 2013 declaring her commitment to the protection of our built heritage with special reference to the restoration of the Governor General’s residence and York House, which were severely damaged by hurricane Ivan in September 2004, and remain derelict up to this day.

In this regard it is appropriate that The Sentinel bring to the fore the declaration by the United Nations on world heritage, as follows:

“In a society where living standards are changing at an accelerated pace, it is essential for man’s equilibrium and development to preserve for him a fitting setting in which to live, where he will remain in contact with nature and the evidence of civilization bequeathed by past generations; and that to this end, it is appropriate to give the cultural and natural heritage an active function in community life, and to integrate into an overall policy, the achievements of our time, the values of the past and the beauty of nature” UNESCO preamble to Heritage Protection 1972.

Of course, there are several other heritage buildings and sites in our Capital City that have been neglected/ abandoned over the years. A few which come to mind are the St. George’s Market Square, which is undergoing some very insensitive changes, the Anglican and Presbyterian Churches, Edinburgh House on Young Street, the Georgian House on Church Street with an authentic Sedan Chair porch, which is in an advanced stage of decay, the reclaiming of Fort George, and within recent times the abandonment of the Public Library building on the Carenage.

Click To Read More

Where Have You Heard This Before

loosechange

A Change Can Solicits Donations to Help Grenada’s Hospitals – Credit: Trisha Mitchell

By Trisha Mitchell

“I need to vent,” she said. “Grenada, is a great country … BUT the health care there is horrendous. The hospitals leave you waiting for days, there are hardly any Doctors…there is no medication. If there is any, it’s sent from family members abroad and shared with many patients.”

These were the sentiments recently expressed on Facebook by Tiffany Ford, the distraught family member of a patient at the Grenada General Hospital. The fact that this experience almost mirrors my own almost two years ago, expressed in an open letter to the former Minister of Health and the Medical Director (View here), compelled me to pen this article.

The sad fact is, Tiffany is not isolated in her frustration.  Over the years I have heard numerous individuals voice the exact same complaint. What this points to is a cause for grave concern.  Our healthcare system is obviously in dire need of a complete overhaul. Fortunately, this is a problem that current Prime Minister, Dr. Mitchell is very aware of, having heard him voice his concerns at a recent community meeting here in Toronto.

Now, I will be the first to say that the government, in conjunction with our various healthcare professionals and providers, need to lead the discussion with regards to how we can better manage the system. The health of a nation is its wealth, because only when people are healthy can they drive development. I will also take it one step further.  If we are really serious about expanding our tourism product, adequate healthcare is one of the key pillars which also needs to be included as part of the strategic plan for the sector.

Click To Read More

Can Grenada deliver for Branson at Caribbean sustainability summit?

Reblogged from The Hip + The Square:

In just over a fortnight’s time the leaders of Caribbean nations and corporate CEOs will join together to discuss potential solutions to the challenges facing the region in the fight to develop green economies.

Grenada's recently-elected premier, Keith Mitchell will co-host the Caribbean Political and Business Leaders Summit alongside the British Virgin Island (BVI) leader at Sir Richard Branson’s private island in the BVI.

Read more… 447 more words

“No Mangrove, No Mullet.”

Mangrove and Salt Flats at Tyrrel Bay, Carriacou (Grenada)

Mangrove and Salt Flats at Tyrrel Bay, Carriacou (Grenada)

While the ramifications of ecological decisions made by larger countries take longer to manifest, for a small country like Grenada, the impact is felt more quickly and dramatically. For small islands like Carriacou and Petite Martinique, the negative consequences of eliminating part of the ecological system shows up almost immediately.

One of the most important ecological system for tropical countries is the mangrove forest. It is rich in biodiversity and plays a critical role in mitigating coastal erosion and in sustaining a regions marine ecology. It protects coastal areas and reduces devastation to upland areas from the effects of strong winds, tidal waves, and floods that accompany tropical storms by absorbing the high-energy generated by such conditions. In addition, because the root systems trap and filter sediments and contaminants from upland run-off, mangrove habitats help improve water quality for offshore waters and coastal ecosystems, including coral reefs, sea grass, and oyster beds. Furthermore, mangroves moderate the effects of global warning by soaking up and storing carbon in their tree trunks and sediments.

An example of the red mangrove (Rhizophora mangle) tree that is the predominant species in the Tyrrel Bay mangrove. This image shows the thicket created by its prop roots that harbor a variety of species, including oysters. Credit: NPS (cc)

Mangroves help maintain the health of local fisheries by providing habitat, food, and refuge from predators to important species of fish and shellfish. They are vital to the marine food chain. In some areas it is estimated that as much as 75% of larger game fish and 90% of commercial species rely on mangrove systems. Female fish go to mangroves in the early rainy season, when tide water levels are higher, to lay eggs. Data suggests that mangroves are equally or greater in importance to the development of juvenile fish and shellfish populations than sea grass beds, on a comparable area basis.

Fish and shellfish species that start out in mangroves show up as catch to local fisherman. Mangroves also nourish and protect coral reef systems attractive to diving and snorkeling tourists. Consequently, they are a key factor to maintaining sustainable coastal livelihoods.

The ability of mangroves to save the lives of people in coastal communities should not be minimized. In 2007, when Cyclone Nargis devastated the Irrawaddy Delta of Burma, killing 84,537, leaving 53,836 missing, and affecting 2.4 million residents, those living in areas defended by mangroves survived. In Pyapon Township, where over 3000 acre of mangroves forest was restored by the Burmese government, out of a population of 15,000 villagers, only three died from Cyclone Nargis.

Unfortunately, mangrove forests around the world are under severe threat, as countries continue to eliminate them to make way for projects deemed economically advantageous, such as housing, ports, tourism facilities, and unsustainable aquaculture and agriculture farms. Studies suggest that in the 20 year period between 1980 and 2000, there was a 25% decline in mangrove forest area worldwide. Grenada, sadly, is not an exception in this regard.

An example of this is the damage done to the mangrove area of Tyrrel Bay, Carriacou, by a project (started in 2003, but stalled) to build a marina that would accommodate 80 – 100 yachts, hauling and marine services, and shopping. The Tyrrel Bay mangrove, designated a Marine Protected Area, is estimated to be approximately 185 acres in size and is the most significant of three mangrove assemblages on Carriacou. A 46 site survey of mangroves in the Grenadine islands found the presence of oysters only at the Tyrrel Bay mangrove. It is estimated that as much as 10% of the mangrove was destroyed, through clear-cutting and back-filling, in the 2003 attempt to construct the stalled marina project.

There is now a renewed push to move the Tyrrel Bay project forward, with the potential of even greater destruction of the mangrove. Besides the clear-cutting, the project’s plan calls for the dredging of as much 3 acres of the shore front to accommodate yachts. Such action will have, and have had, direct and indirect negative impact on the Tyrrel Bay Mangrove ecosystem.

Satellite View of Destroyed Portion of Tyrrel Bay Mangrove

Satellite View of Destroyed Portion of Tyrrel Bay Mangrove

Dredging performed in 2003 permanently destroyed sea grass beds, displacing species that depended on the habitat for food and breeding areas. Erosion and siltation have been attributed to careless deposition of unconsolidated fill. The resulting effect has been dramatic increase in water turbidity in the area of reclamation and construction.

Change in water levels and water quality in the Tyrrel Bay mangrove greatly increases the potential for damage due to oxygen deprivation to roots and disturbance of its sensitive salinity balance. The effect would be devastating to the oysters and other species that rely on the mangrove for food and protection, and would eliminate a natural protective barrier against storm and tidal surges for the village of Harvey Vale, and severely threaten the marine ecology of Carriacou, including coral reefs and fisheries – both of which are essential to the island’s existing economy.

A cautionary tale may be derived from the failed Ashton Lagoon marina project on neighboring Union Island. There, disregarding the findings of an environmental impact assessment (EIA), that development in the lagoon would have catastrophic effects on water circulation, reefs, seagrass, and

Algae Bloom at Ashton Lagoon - Source: CRMES, Cavehill, UWI

Algal Bloom at Ashton Lagoon – Source: CRMES, Cavehill, UWI

fisheries, the St. Vincent government pushed forward with a foreign developer’s proposal to implement a project in the central section of Ashton Lagoon, consisting of a 300 berth marina, causeways, recreation center, a large condominium on top of the outer reefs, and a 50 acre golf course over the mangroves. When in mid-1995 the developer declared bankruptcy, Ashton Lagoon had been dredged, bisected by causeways, installed with marina berths, and had a road built around the mangrove. The resulting effect was as the EIA predicted, including algae bloom as a result water stagnation, water temperature increase, oxygen level reduction, increased turbidity, and severe reduction in marine life such as Lambi, Lobster, and fish. The only saving grace for Ashton Lagoon was that the project was not fully implemented, saving the mangrove.

That no EIA has been presented for the Tyrrel Bay project should raise questions as to whether the environmental impact of the project has been given any consideration. A mangrove in such close proximity to a marina will be under constant threat from boat pollution, including waste water discharge, storm water runoff, hazardous and solid waste generation, air emissions, fuel spills, spills of other hazardous materials, discharges from boat washing and maintenance operations. In addition, boat traffic will add to the increased water turbidity that resulted from dredging. The minimal construction that has been done for this project has already shown negative impact on the remain mangrove. One can only imagine its effect on the mangrove ecosystem if fully implemented. To date, no plan as to what mitigating steps shall be taken to offset the permanent damage already done, or to protect the remaining mangrove, has been presented.

Clearly, the marina project is about short-term economic gains without consideration for long-term benefits of environmental protection and conservation. And more often than not, economic need wins. Though, as Union Island’s Ashton Lagoon marina project shows, while implementation of a project without focus on sustainability and reduction of environmental impact may benefit the developer, it is the larger community that is hurt by such negligence in the long run.

Tyrrel Bay has long been the harbor of choice for boaters sailing into Carriacou. Because of its horse-shoe shape, it offers excellent protection and shelter for boaters. Lacking a marina, boaters drop anchor and come ashore by dingy.

The proposed marina plan is an attempt by the government to capture revenue from the many boaters that come to Tyrrel Bay, through berthing, service fees, and restocking of good and supplies. To a degree, however, many of the elements outlined in the plan already exist in and about Tyrrel Bay. There are hauling services, waters deep enough to accommodate large yachts without dredging, restaurants and cafes, and small shops along the bay in Harvey Vale, where food and provisions can be purchased. A more wholesome plan would be one that seeks to improve Tyrrel Bay – Harvey Vale as a destination on Carriacou, by including existing elements and stakeholders in the marina plan and design, improving and increasing service offerings (shopping, cafes, bar, restaurants, bakery, bookstore, storefront design, street scape, etc.) at the beach-front of Tyrrel Bay, and working with land-owners to attain or lease land(s) for locating the marina in a way that would not negatively affect the critical ecosystem of Tyrrel Bay. That this approach was abandoned in 2003 for permanently damaging a large swat of the mangrove, shows that planners (government and developer) were more interested in taking the path of least resistance to profits rather than sustainable development for Carriacou.

vlcsnap-2013-04-30-09h00m55s203

Click Photo to See Short Video – Credit: M. Claudius McLeod

A marina can be implemented in Tyrrel Bay that is environmentally sensitive and transforms the area into a true sailing destination. The practice by boaters has been to anchor on the southward portion of the harbor, well away from the mangrove, accommodating boats of all sizes, from small sail boats to large cruising yachts. Floating docks and gangways and berthing slips that extend well into the harbor, eliminating the need for dredging, can be created. The Gateway Marina, (video) located at Gateway National Park, Brooklyn, NY, uses this technology to implement 500 slips in an environmentally sensitive area. Creating a “marina zone” and incorporating existing businesses that offer services called for in the plan, can reduce the construction footprint (requiring less land), and monies that would have been allocated for new construction can be used to improve existing entities and the surroundings. The result would be a sustainable marina acting as a synergistic force for the Tyrrel Bay – Harvey Vale area.

The Tyrrel Bay mangroves are too important to Carriacou, Grenada, and the Grenadines region, to be a sacrificial lamb for a marina. Like at Ashton Lagoon, long after a developer has taken his/her profits or losses and walked away, the ramifications of poor planning and implementation continue to reverberate, and it is the local population who feel the effects. It is the local fisherman, unable to catch enough fish to sell and support his family, that suffers. It is the tour operator who because of dying coral reefs and mangroves, closes up shop and his laid-off workers that suffer. Coastlines erode, leading to flooding and greater storm damages, causing villagers to suffer.

The promise of jobs from development often lead governments and populations to make imprudent choices to achieve economic gain. The failure of the 2003 attempt to implement a marina at Tyrrel Bay is a blessing in disguise; it gives Carriacou and the government of Grenada a second chance to get it right. The people of Carriacou, though, have to loudly demand that any marina at Tyrrel Bay be done right to ensure an economically and environmentally sustainable Carriacou.

Can Carriacou benefit from a marina? Yes. Is Tyrrel Bay the best place for a marina on Carriacou? Yes. Is the current proposed location near the mangrove the best for a marina, though? NO!

As the fishermen of Eritrea came to clearly understand: “No mangrove, no mullet.”

Additional Reading and References:

Assessment of The Mangrove Ecosystem of Tyrrel Bay, Carriacou (Grenada)

Participatory Planning Workshop for the Restoration of Ashton Lagoon

Mangrove Deforestation Affects Coral Reefs

Oil Spills In Mangroves

Cut into the Ground: The Destruction of Mangroves and its Impacts on Local Coastal Communities

Mangrove Ecology

Ecological Importance of mangrove Habitat

Is Grenada losing its food culture?

Fried Bakes with Eggs and Grenadian Cocoa Cappuccino

Is Grenada losing its food culture? This is a reasonable question in the context of the country’s cultural preservation and tourism product.

Before the mega supermarkets and American branded fast food chains, Grenadian food culture very much followed a farm to table paradigm rooted in subsistence farming.

Throughout the country, family owned farms that were planted with assorted vegetables such as corn, peas, okra, potatoes, peppers, tomatoes, and herbs (a tradition that goes back to slavery times), produced fresh, high quality foods that came to define Grenadian cooking. With the raising of live stock, fishing, and a favorable environment for the growth of some of the world most delicious fruits (guava, plums, mangoes, bananas, papaya, soursop, tamarind, sugar apples, passion fruits, sapodilla, etc.), Grenada, though monetarily poor, has always been food rich.

Void of fertilizers, pesticides, and genetically modified anything, Grenadians were eating organically long before “organic” became chic.

Like its people, Grenadian food very much reflects the influences of the many cultures that define its history. In some cases, in one dish the whole melange, from African to French to Spanish to Carib and East Indian, may be represented. This might happen as a result of ingredient, spice or technique.

For example, a dish of cou-cou or rice and peas with stewed chicken is very much indicative of the confluence of cultures that define Grenadian-ness. Both cou-cou and rice and peas have origins in Africa. Grenadian cou-cou derives from the West African dish Fufu and rice and peas, long a staple of the West African diet, comes from Waakey or Waatchi, a dish popular in countries like Ghana and Nigeria.

The stewed chicken that accompanies cou-cou or rice and peas clearly illustrates the amalgam of French, African, East and West Indian influences on Grenadian cooking. The browning of chicken parts, the use of flour to add body, and the reduction of a liquid stock to extract peak flavour, very much point to the conjunction of French and African cooking techniques, while the use of aromatic spices such as cloves, allspice, bay leaf, and curry and hot pepper, ties in the East and West Indian seasonings.

It is, therefore, extremely disappointing to find see little evidence of this rich food heritage in today’s Grenada. Unlike many countries strongly identified with food (Mexico, Thailand, Vietnam, France, Spain, Italy, China, The Middle East), the demonstration of Grenada’s food culture is not presented by an abundance of food stalls, cafes, or restaurants. While markets in the major towns sell raw products (fruits, vegetables, fish, spices, roll cocoa, etc.) produced in Grenada, finding places to sample authentic local dishes can be quite frustrating.

The culture of cheap, delicious street food that acts as a gateway to the cuisines of the above

Fried Sweets – Photo: Enrique Alie

mentioned countries, is sadly missing in Grenada. In these countries, residents and visitors alike are able to quickly access local delicacies through food carts and small sidewalk cafes, offering up sweet and savory samplings.

In France it is the crêpe stand, in the Middle East it is falafel and shawarma, in China it is dumplings, and in Italy, espresso and gelato offerings.

In Mexico, for example, residents and visitors alike have astonishing access to local foods through the many street vendors selling burritos, quesadillas, tamalis, and tacos. It is estimated that an astounding 560,000 street vendors exists in Mexico City – a 8:1 ratio of residents to vendor.

These street food vendors, along with small cafes, offer a valuable low-cost service to workers and tourists, promoting the food culture of a place and helping to maintain its food traditions.

For Grenada, street food vendors can act as the vehicle through which the flavors of many of the food products created in the country can be sampled.

In the traditional foods that define Grenadian cooking, there are many dishes that can easily be implemented as a food cart item. As in New York City, carts selling warm bakes and hot cocoa tea could come to be just as integral to the lives of Grenadians as are NYC’s bagel and coffee carts. Likewise, offerings like rice and peas and stewed chicken, or rolled cou-cou or rolled rice and peas soup, and cow heal soup can easily be converted to street food. How about grilled, ripe breadfruit on  a stick?  Roti, of course, is a given.

The same is possible with baked goods. Carts could sell coconut tarts, coconut drops, raisin

Doughnut Cart in Sukhothai, Thailand – Photo: Enrique Alie

buns, coconut macaroons, and pound cake. While a vendor can load up with a wide assortment of options, a cart specializing in a single item and concentrating on product excellence, can find comparable success to multi-offering vendors.

And there are wonderful drink options, other than soda, that would complement either a sweet or savory choice that can be added to menus. Among these are: sorrel, sea moss, ginger beer, and mauby. In addition, hot drinks such as cocoa and “bush” tea can be adapted to iced drinks.

Beyond the promotion of Grenadian heritage and culture, the absence or paltry existence of food stalls and street carts selling prepared foods is a substantial untapped economy for Grenada. Because street food enterprises are generally small in size, require relatively simple skills, basic facilities, and small amounts of capital, they hold tremendous potential for generating income and employment.

Currently, rolled cocoa is sold, on average, for ~EC$10 for a bag of 4 rolls by many vendors at the different markets in Grenada. But a food vendor who uses one roll to make cocoa tea, has the potential to generate, at a minimum, 10 cups of tea that can be sold at no less than EC$2.00 per cup. This demonstrates the revenue generation that can come from developing avenues, like street food enterprises, for local and visitor consumption of processed Grenadian raw products.

Besides the obvious tourist spots (Grand Anse Beach and the Crusie Ship Terminal), effective implementation of food carts in Grenada would bring them to other popular locations. While areas like the Cruise Ship Terminal can support greater concentration of carts and stalls, implementation at bus stops, government buildings, schools, historic sites and beaches are places where single or multiple food cart operations can thrive.

The ferry dock on the Carenage is an example of an area that can support and benefit from the installation of food carts. For passengers queuing to board the morning boat (many of whom are hungry from long plane flights into Grenada or have rushed to the boat without breakfast), a few carts or stalls with assorted food offerings would be a welcome option.

Grenada is a country with a rich food history. That history should not be obscured by pizza, burgers, baked macaroni, or Subway sandwiches, but celebrated with food traditional to the country.

Given that the majority of restaurants in the country are the result of non-native investors catering to tourists, it is understandable menus more often reflect New Orleans than Grenada or the Caribbean.  After all, these are individuals who are, for the most part, culturally removed from Grenadian cuisine.

It is also true that few locals have the kind of investment capital or business knowledge needed to establish and run a large food operation. The effective implementation of street food enterprises- with a focus on sanitation, esthetics, and business management- can create a pathway for greater participation in Grenada’s food service and hospitality economy by local entrepreneurs, while promoting and maintaining Grenada’s rich food heritage.

 

Grenada Individual Investor Program: Grenadian Passports for Sale II

For Sale?

GIIP (Grenada Individual Investor Program) is a new foreign investment incentive scheme now being proposed by the government of Grenada to raise some much need cash. For many Grenadians, though, because of the failed Economic Citizenship Program of the NNP government (1997 – 2001) that severely damaged Grenada’s world reputation, GIIP raises anxiety and skepticism.

Hints that the government might once again go down the citizenship by investment road again came in a Christopher DeRiggs (Director of Private Sector Development in the Ministry of Finance) letter, written to the chairman of the board of Touchstone Capital Partners Enterprise of China. In that letter, DeRiggs assures the chairman that “the government of Grenada hereby accepts your proposal” for resident status for potential investors, provided that “the applicants shall pay all applicable fees associated with their application.”

Subsequently, Minister of Tourism, Peter Hood, at a conference in late 2011 acknowledge that the government of Grenada had interest in a proposal for an Investment Incentive Package for qualified applicants. And in early February of this year Finance Minister Burke went on the Sundays With George Grant radio program to outline how a new economic citizenship program might work.

In the previous go around, full Grenadian citizenship for a family of five (spouses, plus 3 children under 25) could be gotten for a sum of US$50,000 – US$39,060 went to the Grenadian government and US$11,000 to an agent handling processing and administrative work. There were no residency requirement, except the need to reside in Grenada for six years to be eligible to vote and hold office (see requirements here).

The low threshold to attain citizenship gained Grenada notoriety for being one of the best country from which to attain a second passport. And this point was explicitly made in advertising campaigns of the numerous firms seeking to assist clients seeking second citizenship.

Among the key selling points boasted was: a hassle-free application process, relatively low investment requirement, favourable fee structure for families, and visa-free travel to a large number of countries, including Canada, The UK, Commonwealth Nations, and Latin American and Scandinavian countries. Click here to see advertisement for the previous Passport and Economic Citizenship program.

Canada saw little of positive value in Grenada’s Economic Citizenship Program, when it devalued Grenadian citizenship, adding Grenada to a list of countries whose citizens would need a visa to enter its border. In its view, Grenada’s Economic Citizenship Program posed a threat to its security and sovereignty, as it was deemed a means by which criminals could gain easy access into Canada. Of high concern was that Grenada had granted Economic Citizenship to a number of people that troubled Canada from a security point of view, or from a point of view of money laundering.

Susan Burrows, who at the time was Immigration Counselor at Canada’s High Commission in Port of Spain, Trinidad, noted that programs like the Grenada’s Economic Citizenship program “… attract the wrong kind of people, mainly people who sometimes are involved in organized crime, sometimes trying to avoid the tax regulations of their home country, sometimes trying to avoid Canada’s immigration determination system, in other words, enter Canada and make a claim to remain in Canada or go underground.” She also pointed out that “often the Economic Citizenship Programs are advertised as a way to circumvent visitor visa requirements.”

The program drew criticism from quarters other than Canada, with some saying the practice allowed criminals to effectively adopt new legal identities for a price.

In 2001, after September 11th and with mounting pressure from the US and Canada, Grenada’s NNP government suspended the Economic Citizenship Program.

But it was little too late. Because the program was suspended not terminated, and hundreds of Grenadian passports were already issued, Canada refused (even with strenuous petitioning by the NNP government) to reverse its decision, and today continues to impose visa restrictions on Grenadians.

The government of Canada notes that its “consistent view remains that, unless citizenship sold under the program are rescinded, it is impossible to sort out which potential visitors to Canada from Grenada are legitimate citizens, and which purchased their status. A review in early 2001 by the Grenada International Financial Services Authority found that a total of 545 passport were issued over the previous two years under the Economic Citizenship program.

Grenada’s reputation (the country was blacklisted as non-cooperative in combating money laundering) and the value of Grenadian citizenship suffered severe damage as a result of the Economic Citizenship program. The program resulted in Grenadian passports being in the hands of unsavory people; created inconvenience for Grenadians and much unflattering publicity for the country in the Caribbean and international media, and derived no clear benefit for Grenada.

In the 2008 election campaign, the now ruling NDC party made the Economic Citizenship program a key issue, lambasting the Mitchell government for the corruption and discredit it brought on Grenada. But Thomas’ NDC government, in the face of enormous financial pressure and a budget deficit estimated to be $EC100 million or greater, would like Grenadians to trust that they will do a better job implementing Economic Citizenship as GIIP.

Finance Minister Nazim Burke, describes the program as a legitimate investment tool that offers Grenada “opportunities to attract direct and indirect resources.” The program the Thomas government seeks to setup, he notes, will offer citizenship on the basis of fair and lasting contributions that is beneficial to the country as a whole.

GIIP will distinguish itself from the previous failed Citizenship-By-Investment scheme by:

  • Modeling existing global programs.
  • Establishing an independent oversight structure, lacking involvement of politicians or individuals.
  • Implementing stronger due diligence and screening.
  • Ensuring transparency through yearly parliamentary and independent auditing.

To remove any political influence on GIIP, the Grenada Individual Investor Program Authority (GIIPA) is to be established. This independent statutory panel body is to be headed by the Solicitor General and include the Permanent Secretary in the Prime Minister’s Ministry, Accounting General, Director of the Finance Intelligence Unit, Chief Immigration Officer, and a Representative from GIDC, NGO, Business Community, and the Conference of Churches.

The NDC government propose modeling GIIP on the Economic Citizenship program of St. Kitts and Nevis, where with a US$500,000 dollar investment in government identified real estate or US$300,000 in the Sugar Industrial Diversification Fund (SIDF), one can qualify for second citizenship.

According to Finance Minister Nazim Burke, GIIP will seek to setup the same mix of direct and indirect investment, with an option to obtain Grenadian citizenship by direct contribution to private sector projects or indirectly to an independent fund that will be setup, separate from the country’s consolidated funds, and called the Transformation Fund.

While direct investments will likely target the tourism sector, funds collected in the Transformation Fund will go towards the development of the 5 economic sectors identified in the budget as critical to developing Grenada’s economy and public infrastructure – Financial Services, Information Communication technology (ICT), Tourism Services, Education Services,  Cultural and Entertainment and Sporting Services.

In the February 26th, 2012 interview with George Grant, Minister Burke speaking for the Tillman Thomas government, said GIIP is viewed as a legitimate investment tool that offers opportunities to attract direct and indirect resources to Grenada; expand the national economy and increase the revenue base of the country, increase employment generation, and will be a source of foreign exchange for Grenada.

The framework of this new Investment Citizenship Program is being develop in consultation with the law firm of Henley & Partners, a principle player in St. Kitts and Nevis’ Economic Citizenship program. Registered in Jersey, an island in the English Channel known for its off-shore tax status in the United Kingdom, Henley bills itself as a “citizenship and residence planning” firm that manages and markets parts of citizenship programs.

Burke indicates that Henley & Partners will become the sole agent handling GIIP applications, with the firm handling the first phase of applicant screening and due diligence. It is not clear what fee structure will be established. But if structured as in St. Kitts, Henley & Partners can derive as much as $35,000 in fees per transaction, plus a share of the investment made into the Transformation Fund. In St. Kitts, developers indicate that the firm receives commissions (from developers) when clients buy property.

Aware of the anxiety and skepticism that lingers among Grenadians from the failed 1997-2001 Economic Citizenship scheme, Minister Burke seem to outline steps meant to address the list of concerns most associated with Economic Citizenship program. He points to the GIIPA as a way to eliminate corruption and secret deals and to avoid political controversies; internal and external audits for insuring transparency, and better due diligence meant to provide safeguards against Grenadian citizenship and passport being assigned to persons of ill repute.

Minister Burke did admit that there are no guarantees against things not going as planned. Two recent incidents that best exemplifies this occurred in Austria and Montenegro, two European countries that offers citizenship by investment. The affair in Austria triggered a parliamentary inquiry and court case that resulted in a jail sentence for corruption as a result of promises to facilitate Austrian citizenship for a Russian businessman at EU$5 million. In Montenegro, naturalization of Taksin Shinawatra – the former Prime Minister of Thailand who has been convicted of corruption – as a Montenegrin citizen created quite a stir with Montenegro and the EU when the Ministry of Interior refused to reveal the details of this issue, referring to the Law on the Protection of Personal Data.

Already there is a controversy stirring around GIIP as a result of the involvement of Mr. Wendell Lawrence, a St. Kitts businessman and political power-player, in advising Grenada in development of the program. It is asserted that Mr. Lawrence’s positions as a partner in the firm of Henley & Partners in the citizenship-by-investment group; member of the board of directors of the Eastern Caribbean Central Bank (ECCB) – the regional financial regulatory institution, and membership in the Caribbean Court of Justice’s Regional Judicial and Legal Services Commission represents a conflict of interest.

Grenada is facing enormous financial pressure with few options to quickly increase the island’s revenues to address economic challenges. So it probably should be of no surprise that the Tillman Thomas government which came in opposed to Economic Citizenship now embraces it as a savior for Grenada and its agenda.

When the 1997-2001 Economic Citizenship scheme was suspended in 2001, the government at the time estimated that approximately US$1.8 to US$2.1million in revenue would be lost. It is estimated that St. Kitts and Nevis processed approximately 1000 – 1500 applications in 2011, adding an estimated US$150 – 200 million to the country’s coffers. But for those thinking that GIIP is a cure all for Grenada’s economic whoas, closer inspection might help temper any future disappointments.

Though St. Kitts and Nevis has ran the longest continuous Citizenship-By-Investment scheme in the world, the country still faces formidable economic challenges. Currently, it has a debt of around US$3 Billion – nearly twice the country’s GDP and is ranked the 2nd most indebted nation in the world, a poverty rate of around 24%, and even with Citizenship-By-Investment, it has not experience buffeting from the global economic downturn and has seen increasing unemployment and economic contraction.

If St. Kitts and Nevis is any indicator, GIIP will likely have little impact on Grenada’s economic conditions in the near term. For example, even though St. Kitts and Nevis has processed over 1000 Citizenship-By-Investment applications in 2011, it is experiencing contraction in the construction sector of it economy. Because investments in the real estate component of St. Kitts and Nevis’ economic citizenship program are consider to carry greater risk (limited resale market), most are directed to the privately managed SIDF, resulting in limited increase in construction demand.

Because of the speed at which they can be implemented and the cash potential they represent, for developing, small state governments facing economic challenges and with limited revenue generating resources, Economic Citizenship programs like GIIP that commoditize citizenship/passports for quick cash infusion appear logical. But selling citizenship/passports brings controversy and raise numerous contentious questions in the global community related to tax, evasion, extradition, and corruption. They reduce citizenship to a trade for money and not for genuine ties with a country.

Prime Minister of St. Vincent, Ralph Gonsalves, summarized this recently when he expressed that Economic Citizenship programs “undermine our soul, our sovereignty and independence and sell our birth right of citizenship and our passport.”

As the 1997 – 2001 Economic Citizenship scheme proved, there are costs to bear when things go wrong. When suspended in 2001, the cost outweighed the benefits. If implemented, will the benefit of GIIP outweigh its costs?

Additional Reading:

The Pros and Cons of Ius Pecuniae: Investor Citizenship in Comparative Perspective

Passport to Paradise Leads to Restrictions

Canada – Grenada Relations

Economic Citizenship Proposal Is PM’s Business

That’s How Our Ruler Rolls

Conflict Of Interest And Red Flags?

“SIDF” Government Bails Out The Insolvent St. Kitts and Nevis Government; Two Governments But Only One Prime Minister

Cruise Ships A “Trojan Horse” To Caribbean Islands?

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic License

A recent article by author Rob MacLellan and published on the blog site Barbados Free Press, assesses the shifting dynamics of the cruise ship industry on the economy of Caribbean nations.

More and more cruise ships, design as floating hotels, entertainment, and shopping complexes, are competing with and negatively affecting the land based hotel industry in Caribbean islands. And the competitive edge the cruise ship industry enjoys is likely having a downward impact on internal investments in the tourism sector.

Mr. MacLellan notes that an almost 5:1 discrepancy exist between the amount passengers spend on board the ships verses on shore. It is a relationship that is becoming more parasitic than symbiotic, as the cruise industry operates virtually tax free in the region, yet require islands to bear the majority of the cost to meet demands for larger facilities to accommodate their ships.

The 1999 Carnival Cruise Line decision to ceased calling at Port St. George’s over an US$1.50 per passenger Environmental Levy to help meet the cost of solid waste management and disposal from their operations, exemplifies the imbalance in the relationship of cruise ships to the islands.

In light of well publicized incidents such as the grounding of the Costa Concordia and Allegra, MacLellan raises concerns about the preparedness of Caribbean Islands to deal with similar events and the resulting damage to both the environment and the tourism economies they so heavily depend on.

As such, his article is a wake up call to the Caribbean region to realign its relationship with the cruise ship industry, else find that they are dragging along they “Trojan Horse”.

Caribbean Cruise Ships – The Imbalance of Risk / Reward and A Trojan Horse

by Robert MacLellan

April’s annual Caribbean Hotel and Tourism Investment Conference in Puerto Rico provides a highly appropriate time and venue to raise questions about the future of the cruise industry in the Caribbean and its impact on the region’s hotel sector.

Since the beginning of 2012 alone, four cruise ships have now experienced very serious incidents which could have resulted in disastrous damage to the marine environment in tourism dependent areas of the world. One ship, the MSC Poesia, was stranded on a reef in early January while approaching Port Lucaya, Bahamas. The other three ships drifted helplessly, without power or steering capability.  The Azamara Quest was adrift for 24 hours in late March near the UNESCO World Heritage Site of the Tubbataha Reefs in the Philippines. The Costa Allegra was adrift in late February near the pristine Alphonse group of coral atolls in the Seychelles, until towed to port by a fishing boat, and the Costa Concordia drifted until it capsized on rocks in mid January on the Italian tourist island of Giglio.

The Caribbean is THE most tourism dependent region in the world, marketing itself primarily on its pristine beaches and reefs. In total, over 60% of the world’s cruise ship fleet is in the Caribbean in the winter high season – a greater number of ever larger ships today – but which, self evidently, have inadequate emergency back-up systems to allow safe operation of the vessel in the event of a major fire or severe grounding or collision.

Costa is a division of Carnival Group and Azamara is one of Royal Caribbean Group’s brands. Together, their ships call at every major tourist island in the Caribbean. These two groups completely dominate the world cruise industry and their financial resources dwarf the GDP of most island economies in the region.

Few resources exist in most Caribbean island ports to limit the effect of similar or greater cruise ship incidents – a serious grounding or collision could result in a devastating and long term environmental disaster. Most cruise ships move to “high season” in other parts of the world at the end of the Caribbean’s winter season and detailed cruise itineraries within the region can be readily changed. Therefore, in the event of a disaster, it is a single island government or small group of governments which will bear the full environmental and economic impact.

How much cooperation or finance have Caribbean governments received from cruise lines to even help resource effective disaster planning in order to mitigate these risks? In overall terms, what is the actual economic risk/reward balance with cruise ships in the Caribbean?

Caribbean government port taxes have not even kept up with regional inflation rates and in recent years the shore-side spend per cruise ship passenger on each island appears to have declined significantly. Today, even the discretionary spend per cruise ship passenger in the Caribbean is estimated at 82% on board and 18% on shore. While the economic benefit to island economies has declined on a per passenger basis, cruise ships continue to operate in a virtual tax free environment within the region – yet they require island governments to finance and build larger expensive piers for their larger, more cost efficient ships.

Furthermore, today’s cruise ship business model is now a highly aggressive one, operating from multiple home ports in the USA. Larger ships have lower levels of capital and operating unit costs and, thus, correspondingly lower fares – as low as US$45 per passenger per day,

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic License

including meals. Construction cost of the larger ships is around US$250,000 per cabin, compared to US$750,000 per room for a new 4/5 star resort in the Caribbean. Cruise ship food costs, liquor costs and comparable labor costs are lower than in Caribbean hotels.

The cruise industry’s overpowering competitive edge over Caribbean hotels in high season is a “Trojan Horse” with its resultant negative impact on inward investment for new resorts. This factor has been consistently and grossly underestimated both by governments and the private sector in the region. In the meantime, Caribbean hotels struggle desperately to absorb ever higher energy and food costs, while being the largest direct and indirect tax contributors and the largest employers in almost every economy in the region. The region’s governments tax their own major “export” industry, while allowing massive international corporations to make massive profits from the Caribbean’s natural resources.

Is it not time that the fiscal contribution by cruise lines to Caribbean governments more fairly reflected the industry’s impact on the local environment and, ultimately, their potential for environmental disaster in the region? If the Caribbean Tourism Organisation is evidently not powerful enough for that challenge, then Caricom governments should act with the governments of Mexico and Central America to present a united front in negotiating with the cruise lines.

In today’s global cruise market from November to April there are virtually no realistic, alternative itineraries to the Caribbean – relative to major passenger feeder countries, adequate port facilities, attractive tourism infrastructure and cruising distances. Cruise ships are currently “using” most Caribbean destinations almost for free. NOW is a highly appropriate time to end that scenario – while the cruise industry is struggling hard to protect its image and to achieve good “corporate citizen” status. Even Alaska, on its own, negotiated a better deal for its ports. The countries of the Caribbean basin can and should dictate better terms with the cruise lines, while also helping to protect their own domestic hotel industry.

Robert MacLellan

Shame!

The Parliament Building, February 2012

In many countries, there exist a building that is a national symbol. As such, the preservation and well being of this symbol is fiercely protected. For Grenada, that building should be The Parliament Building, York House.

Yet today, The Parliament Building languishes in a state of uncertain future. Because no steps have been taken to mitigate against continued damage due the loss of the roof in Hurricane Ivan, the building is rapidly being rendered an unsalvageable ruin.

As the entrance doors flap in wind, they open and shut to reveal extensive deterioration and destruction of the internal structures and decorative details of the building. The upper floor is collapsing unto the lower, with valuable materials needed for the rebuilding of the Parliament Building, including joist, studs, and carved elements, falling out of the building into the court yard.

Looking at the building from street level, it is clear that the upper floor is now a shell. But the Parliament Building was largely intact after Ivan, except for the damage to the roof, windows, and a small area of bricks that were dislodge as a result of the disturbance to rafters.

While the majority of galvanized panels were blown off and the rafter system affected, a good amount of the rafters, including the decking boards. remained in place. The significance of this is that the

Parliament Building, February 2010

remaining rafters offered the opportunity to quickly erect temporary roofing for The Parliament Building, in order to arrest any further damage to this important Grenadian Heritage site. But for some reason, this was not done. Why?

After all, this was not a difficult engineering challenge exacerbated by unstable walls – proven by the fact that the building continues to stand today, even though its internal supporting structures are allowed to rot. The simple solution would have been to collect as much of the blown-off galvanize sheets as possible, prop up the surviving rafters and build temporary rafters where none existed, and then proceed to cover the building using the collected and new galvanized sheets, and board up all broken windows.

In the long term, since Grenada lacks a skilled labor force with expertise in the restoration of 18th and 19th century architecture, it would have been, and still is, prudent that expert

consultants be brought in to assist in the restoration, and help in building a core of workers with the skills needed for the maintenance and preservation of The Parliament Building and other Grenadian heritage sites – and there are many.

Were these simple steps taken, the conversation today regarding the future of The Parliament Building would be a whole lot different. Instead, Grenadians are facing a real possibility that a national symbol, that should stand to represent the strength of the nation, will crumble to rubble. Shame!

Other steps that should and must be taken are:

  • the assessment of a $1US surcharge on all visitors to Grenada, that will go directly to a fund for the rebuilding of the capital.
  • Ongoing fund raising and appeals to large corporation and foundations, wealthy individuals.
  • Continuous involvement of the Grenadian diaspora for both cash donations and contribution of labor and knowledge.
  • Development of a foreign exchange program that send Grenadians to foreign countries with rich preservation cultures, while creating a host program that enables foreign skilled workers to come to Grenada cheaply, and train Grenadian workers.

Because of the lack of mitigating action, the cost to restore The Parliament Building has grown astronomically. Where in the immediate period after Ivan, the work would have entailed restoring the roof, repairing broken windows, replacing

View of the Destruction Through the Front Door

dislodged bricks, and addressing water damage, today, because of 7+ years of neglect, a complete gut jobs is likely needed, with a high likelihood that the historic interior of the building will be lost forever (It is rumored that Trinidad offered to rebuild The Parliament Building in the early days after Ivan, but the offer was refused).

There have been reports that the US and Australian government would assist with funding for the building of The Parliament Building. These report go back to 2007/2008, and yet to date, there are no sign of movement to begin work.

Surprisingly, the government has gone forward with two projects in the town that raises questions about their priorities and commitment to fiercely protect Grenada’s national symbols. The pavilion being constructed above Sendall Tunnel and the work being done on market square are two projects whose funds would have been better spent in repairing sites like The Parliament Building and Fort George.

While there is value in the eventual restoration of the market square, this could have waited, And the pavilion above Sendall Tunnel is silly. It will create a sitting area so tourist can gather and gaze upon all the dilapidated and falling buildings in the town – a few located immediately in front or next to it. This is clearly an example of screwed up priorities. As, one would think that first you fix the view before creating a place to see it.

St. George’s stand at the precipice of losing its historic character. The ramifications have already started to manifest themselves, as it was reported that some cruise ship operators were looking to cut the number of calls to Grenada. The neglect of national symbols, like The Parliament Building, has economic consequences. This shouldn’t be a surprise for a nation that so heavily depends on tourism.

Tourists travel to experience culture and history. National symbols like The Parliament Building are important in telling the story of a people (if walls can talk…). They define the past and help give definition to the future. National symbols are an example of a nation’s strength. What does it say about Grenada that after almost eight years, it has not devised any apparent solution for repairing one of its most important national symbols? But instead, is allowing it to fall to the ground.

The Grenada University Project at Mt. Hartman – A Win-Win for Grenadians?

Bru Pearce, the man seeking to single-handily remake Grenada according to his vision, has put forward a plan that would see the development of a university town and medical tourism facilities at the Mt. Hartman Estate and Hog Island.

Pearce’s proposal envisions an expansion of St. George’s University(SGU) as the cornerstone upon which Medical and Education Tourism in Grenada can be built.

Estimated to cost $450 million dollar (US), Pearce’s plan calls for:

  • A 400 bed hospital complex (200 teaching; 200 tourism).
  • 3 and 5 star hotels.
  • housing and service (restaurants, shops, etc) for staff, staff family, and students.
  • A school for the children of staff.
  • Luxury residential development on Hog Island.
  • Development of a Heliport and Terminal for executive jets.

Secondarily, the plan would implement:

  • A School of Environmental Studies,climate change adaptation, permaculture and alternative energy.
  • Expansion of some of SGU’s science programs (vet and marine biology schools).
  • A medical research park.
  • A alternative and complementary medicine facility and school.
  • Retirement and nursing homes.
  • A yacht club, with small craft sailing.
  • Sports facility-dive, squash, tennis, gym, dance, yoga.

The resulting benefits sited are:

  • Improved educational opportunities
  • Jobs across all sectors
  • Opportunities for local businesses
  • Improved healthcare
  • Business and investment opportunities
  • Access to larger student market

In its presentation, Pearce sites the statements from the Government of Grenada’s 2011 budget statement, regarding a focus to establish a Grenada based teaching hospital that would bolster St. George’s University, and limit its reliance on the use of US hospitals for clinical rotations and internships, as corollary to his proposal.

But while the teaching hospital has merit, the potential of medical tourism might warrant additional scrutiny. Notable are the following:

  1. Studies show that claims about income generated from medical tourism are usually speculative, based on estimates, without clear definition and remarkably rounded. Numbers given by some countries and hospitals, regarding the success of their medical tourism product, are substantial exaggerations. But the implied success encourages private investments and national support.
  2. Places with recognized competence in medical tourism are almost always “backyards”, close to the source of medical tourist in richer countries rather than playgrounds. An example of this is the US and Mexico, and the cross boarder travel by European citizens for medical treatment.
  3. Having comfort with and a favorable impression of caregivers and institutions in the host nation is important. For example, US patients might not be less reticent to seek treatment in India or Thailand, because of their experience of being treated by American-trained Indian and South Asian doctors. This sense of trust comes from the opinion that returning health workers have been trained under the same standards as host nation health workers. Studies show that the ability to attract skilled health workers in the diaspora, that have trained in the source nations, is essential to the development of a countries’ medical tourism product.
  4. An established and growing middle class, that demand superior healthcare provide a strong foundation upon which medical tourism can develop. In the few countries with recognized competence in medical tourism, a generalist approach rather than specialism (sought by news comers and smaller countries) has been implemented. Mr. Pearce’s plan indicates a reliance on attracting wealthy foreigners. This strategy will likely require sustained advertising and marketing campaigns. This raises questions about who will be paying.
  5. The presence of major international airline hubs and airlines, and well-developed infrastructure contribute substantially in the development and success of medical tourism. While Mr. Pearce’s proposal included plans for implementing accommodations for a heliport and area for private jets at the international airport, the ongoing challenge Grenada has had generating airlift into the country must be considered when assessing this part of the Pearce plan.

Lastly, but importantly, Grenadians might want to hold a bit of skepticism as to whether they will realize improved healthcare from medical tourism in Grenada, since it has been shown that medical tourism can effect shifts in resources within the “host” country from the local population to profit-generating foreigners. In many countries where implemented, a “dual healthcare” system exist, where sophisticated providers exists to serve expatriates, foreign and wealthy domestic patients, but the services for the local population is rudimentary.

Whatever wealth results from this Medical Tourism, there is little, if any, evidence that it does away with existing economic and social inequities in a developing country like Grenada. Grenada has to ensure it does not heal the world while its people remain at the back of the queue.

Learn more about the Bru Pearce Plan here.

References:

1. Cohen, I. Glenn, 2011. Medical Tourism, Access to Health Care, and Global Justice. The Virginia Journal of International Law, vol. 52

2. Rawlinson, Mary J. 2010. Justice across borders: The case of medical tourism. International Association of Women Philosophers

3. Connell, John, 2006. Medical tourism: Sea, sun, sand and y surgery. Tourism Management, vol. 27

Agency for Rural Transformation (ART) Remembers George Brizan

George Brizan Speaking Before ART

The Board of Directors, Management and staff of the Agency for Rural Transformation Ltd.(ART) joins the nation in saluting the life and contribution of the late George Ignatius Brizan, Grenada’s sixth Prime Minister – educator, historian, author, economist, nation builder.

Educator

George Brizan served Grenada with distinction in the field of education. Educator par excellence, he was revered by his many students upon whom he had a profound influence. He impressed and inspired them with his passion and enthusiasm and his dedication to excellence. He also reminded them that, even though Grenada was a small country, what mattered in the world was one’s ability so one should strive always for excellence. He extolled “service to country and to humanity” and he also exhorted his protégés to remain grounded and to always remember that “no matter how high you climb, NEVER forget from whence you came”.

Politician

Dedication to the Development of Agriculture

At various times of his political career, George Brizan served as Minister of Finance, Minister of Agriculture and for a brief period as Prime Minister. He was a very popular Minister of Agriculture and up to this day, he is still revered by both the farmers of the nation and the staff of the Ministry of Agriculture who served under his tenure as Minister. He believed in agriculture and in the potential of Grenada’s “black gold”, nutmegs, whose wealth and possibilities still remain virtually untapped.

Following his departure from active political life, his please to seriously address the development of the nutmeg sector have largely fallen on deaf ears and it is ironic that it was Montserratian Joel Webbe of W & W Spices who recognized Mr. Brizan for his epic work, Nutmegs, Grenada’s Black Gold – a labour of love that he freely gave to his Grenadian people. Mr. Brizan held the view that the key to Grenada’s economic development lay in the development of the nutmeg sector. Now, as the nation confronts a serious economic crisis, perhaps the greatest tribute that Grenada can pay to Mr. Brizan would be to realize the vision of its black gold.

Mr. Brizan was also a proponent of “Eat What You Grow and Grow What You Eat!”. He was aware of the superior nutritional value of our local fruits and members of the Extension staff in the Ministry of Agriculture fondly recall how, as Minister of Agriculture, Mr. Brizan never missed any opportunity to expound on the virtues of the humble West Indian cherry. As an economist, he could situate “eating local” within the context of health and national development and as someone who battled diabetes, “eating local” held special significance for him.

Voluntary Structural Adjustment Programme

As Minister of Finance, Mr. Brizan was the architect of Grenada’s voluntary structural adjustment programme implemented between 1991 and 1994. When the National Democratic Congress came into office in 1990, Grenada was not credit worthy. This situation was aggravated by the collapse of world prices for nutmegs in 1991. The nutmeg sector had enjoyed a boom as a result of trading arrangements with Indonesia. However, with the deregulation of the Indonesian economy by the IMF, world prices for nutmegs plummeted. The rural economy collapsed and nation faced an economic crisis.

While not popular, the structural adjustment programme was necessary. Undertaking a voluntary structural adjustment programme, represented Grenada confronting its problems rather than surrendering ownership of these problems to the IMF and IMF conditionalities. It was a declaration of independence, of sovereignty and of Mr. Brizan’s confidence that, even as a small country, we had the capacity to do it ourselves. It was also his knowledge that Grenada could not survive IMF conditionalities, which were causing riots in other parts of the world. It was a very difficult period for the nation. Sacrifices and hard work were required.

During that period, it was noticeable that the Ministry of Finance was professionalized. Many of the graduates who had come back from Cuban universities had been, to date, marginalized. A number of them who had studied economic planning were former students of Mr. Brizan. They were welcomed into the Ministry of Finance where they became part of a cadre of competent policy analysts who had the responsibility for guiding Grenada through that turbulent period. Grenada owes a debt of gratitude to Mr. Brizan and his team who steered Grenada through that difficult period to restore Grenada’s creditworthiness.

EU – ACP Relations

During his tenure, as Minister of Finance, Grenada benefited significantly from European Union development funds and indeed Grenada became a model partner. One recalls that after his departure from active politics, he lent support to the New National Party administration under Dr. Keith Mitchell to restore Grenada’s good standing with the European Union. He explained to the nation that his consideration based was the national interests and not narrow partisan interests. He also lent similar support to the government of St. Vincent and the Grenadines.

As Grenada’s Minister of Finance, Mr. Brizan had the opportunity to chair the group of African, Caribbean and Pacific states and make his mark on the world stage.

Author

Mr. Brizan’s retirement from active political life was hastened by his struggle with diabetes. But, by his application of rigorous discipline, he won the battle and was able to return to his intellectual pursuits of research and writing. He was a prolific author and one of his legacies will be his collection of published works among which is the well known “Island of Conflict”, a history of Grenada. In 2009, he did his last book launch, “She Stood Alone”’( co-authored with his daughter) which pays tribute to the contribution of Grenadian women to nation building.

Speaking at the launch, Mr. Brizan noted the leadership exhibited by Grenadian women in all walks of life, their creativity, hard work and pragmatism in dealing with challenges of survival. He suggested that there were many lessons to be learned from the stories of these humble women which would still be applicable to our present situation. Besides paying homage to the women of the nation, he appeared to be reminding us to search within ourselves to find the answers to the problems that confronted us. We had been there and done it. To some, it also seemed that it was an implicit call to the women of the country to claim a more prominent place in the political leadership of our country.

George Brizan, a distinguished son of the soil served his nation selflessly. His earthly work is done but his legacy is assured.

The Agency for Rural Transformation Ltd.(ART) extends sincere condolences to his family, friends, professional and political colleagues. May he rest in peace!