Thursday, July 5 2012

THE EDITOR: Why doesn’t the state run two detailed animations of the highways proposed by both sides. Show by computer animation without propaganda, what effects and benefits the highway will have if done the way energy companies and government want it.

And, without bias or minimisation, show what effects and benefits the highway will have if constructed along the path emphasised by Dr Kublalsingh and others. What is the point of TT boasting of itself as an information and communication technology nation and not using the technology to answer expensive, controversial questions on national infrastructure development and expansion?

The issue is not land grabbing. Still the spin doctors are feverish to turn the reroute movement’s struggle to protect their way of life, community and balanced ecosystem into one of land grabbing.

Those paying attention know that the residents are not aiming to cheaply claim state land. Their concern has to do with the effects of building a highway atop several natural rivers, through a swamp by filling it up with aggregate, vastly altering the natural topography of the land and spending several billions in excess of what the rerouted highway would cost. And, from where is the aggregate to be sourced? All indications say from the Northern Range — a protected nature sanctuary according to Asa Wright.

The land that the reroute movement occupies serves as nothing more than a meeting place. Their presence there serves as a symbol of the collective distress each resident knows they will suffer should government surrender to the dictates of energy companies and build the highway through the path proposed.



B JOSEPH

via e-mail