Wednesday, April 30, 2008


Tony Fraser in his Guardian column wants the PM to answer the pertinent questions on the 'cultural hotel', titled "Clarification on 60-room hotel needed".

As Tony puts it, "In this respect, this column does not take issue with Calder Hart, he can only exercise power and authority where they are given to him, lawfully or otherwise.
From practical experience known to the population and from the fact that Prime Minister Patrick Manning has appointed and re-appointed him to a number of senior positions in the cabinet and party, the conclusion must be that Dr Keith Rowley is a sane, logical and intellectually capable man."

Meantime the Newsday's Andre Bagoo has a story confirming that the EMA is fining Udecott "for an administrative breach over its failure to disclose plans to construct a 60-room hotel on the site of the National Academy for the Performing Arts."
He says the Communications Officer at the EMA Nayantara Hassan confirmed the decision to fine Udecott.

"EMA fines Udecott",77949.html

Well Andre, good on you for getting the story, but it comes almost one week after the issue was first raised.
Why did it take so long to get an answer?

"In correspondence with the EMA dated June 28, 2005, HCP Architects Limited described the project but made no mention of a hotel. Another site plan lodged by the architects dated May 11, 2005 also fails to disclose plans for a hotel. The EMA eventually granted the CEC on August 11, 2005."

When did you approach the EMA? Hopefully right after Dr Rowley raised the issue and not as a knee-jerk reaction to Eden Shand, whose most recent press release you incidentally quoted from.
Was this your source?