There are new questions regarding a recent ‘Open Letter’ to the government complaining about the effect of noise pollution on Rodney Bay residents.
Tourism Minister Dr. Ernest Hilaire first questioned who wrote the document, declaring it a political statement based on its wording.
Hilaire felt the letter should have identified the individual who wrote it.
On Wednesday, a press release from ‘The Rodney Bay Residents Association’ also raised questions about the letter and its authorship.
“We would have preferred that the person had taken credit as “A resident of Rodney Bay” rather than “The residents of Rodney Bay,” the press release, reproduced below, stated.
PRESS RELEASE: We the residents of Rodney Bay have embraced the growth of Rodney Bay into a Tourism Hub; with all the attendant services such development has spawned.
We have also welcomed the advent of bars and restaurants as an adjunct to said growth, because we believe holistically, it’s a good thing, adding charm and an opportunity for nighttime entertainment for residents and tourists alike to sample the cuisine and night life our island has to offer.
However, we must find a way to peacefully coexist, and for this to happen there must be mutual respect! Business owners should be able to make a profit, while allowing the residents to enjoy their homes safely in peace and tranquility.
Over the years we have held several meetings with bar owners and the police – In 2019 at the Coco Palm Conference room, in December 2022, at the Bay Gardens Conference facility with the Parliamentary Representative, and more recently in July 2023 with ACP Lamontagne, Inspector Henry, and residents of Reduit, Rodney Bay and Cap Estate in attendance.
At our July 2023 meeting, suggestions were made, through the Police officers present, that the Police Commissioner amend the permits to play loud music by inserting Decibel limits, which if he/she did, would assist the police, because loud music without defining a decibel ceiling is subjective.
Such action would not be without precedent as enshrined within our Public Health Act which regulates noise pollution, are noise limits specified in decibels to be observed during both the night and day. We have also committed to supply at least two decibel meters to the police.
We distributed to several people, including Our Parliamentary Representative, ACP Lamontagne and Inspector Henry a copy of a report commissioned by the Government of Saint Lucia, compiled by The United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC).
This report dated November 2003 and entitled “Planning Standards for the Rodney Bay area” is a comprehensive report which dealt with, among other matters, noise and made suggestions on how to have bars, restaurants and entertainment outfits co-exist, recognizing that the area is a mixed-use Community.
In August, we, the residents of Reduit/Rodney Bay and environs, wrote to our Parliamentary Representative and the Commissioner of Police attaching our petition signed by over 300 households. To date not even an acknowledgement has been received.
While we do not know who the author of the recently circulated open letter to the Government of Saint Lucia is, we would have preferred that the person had taken credit as “A resident of Rodney Bay” rather than “The residents of Rodney Bay” because we view the issue of noise as non-political.
It is therefore unfortunate that it is this letter which has solicited a video response from the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Tourism, Dr. Ernest Hilaire.
It is even more curious that the letter should prompt a press release from the Saint Lucia Labour party, yet our collective attempts to have our voices heard, on this issue of noise over the years, have been met with total silence and a complete ignoring of the issue.
Following are copies of the documents submitted to the Commissioner of Police and the Parliamentary Representative which include:
- Cover letters from Reduit/Rodney Bay Residents
- Reduit/Rodney Bay Residents Petition
- Section, dealing with Noise, of the report commissioned by the Government of Saint Lucia produced by United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC). Dated November 2003 entitled “Planning Standards for the Rodney Bay area”
What’s the big deal? Fact is, the letter represents the views of the majority of residents in Reduit, Rodney Bay , Rodney Heights and environs. Your letter now makes it appear foolish and partisan. Please give me a break. Hilaire’s response was based on that same “Sousair Mentality” that affects everything done in this country.
Regardless of who wrote the open letter to the government of Saint Lucia, the matters raised should be considered paramount to the quality of life deserved by residents of Rodney Bay as your now press release seems to suggest their is indeed a problem with noise in Rodney Bay. Why can’t Saint Lucians be apolitical? Everything seems to be political in this country and yet no one seems to be taking their responsibilities seriously, as your now press release alleged that you did contact the government concerning issues of noise and coexisting with businesses…no wonder things are mess in regards to politics in Saint Lucia…too much partisan politics… Saint Lucia has so much potential but this ilk of politicians are just incompetent and lack professionalism…what an embarrassment……
Omer, the big deal is, the contents of the letter are politically malicious. Extremely damaging ! The writer is no less malicious : A snake in the grass should be identified and made public. The hacks are like the fruits falling from the tree. They were willing to crucify Hilaire.
Who cares who wrote the letter? Seems to me that they did Gods work! It’s even stated above, that this letter finally made the government even acknowledge your plight. Do not let the government use scare tactics to wiggle out of their responsibilities to serve YOU as citizens. This noise pollution is clearly a serious issue and your community deserves to be heard and this issue addressed. Best of luck to you all.
The person who is suggesting it be so fine tune is equally self centered individual because the “a” and “the” break down is just exposing such person with a selfish mind set. Again our people are so self-centered hungry leadership mentality who only wanted to make themselves known and that’s just about it. Nothing go further, if a person used the term “the” isn’t it coinside with what everyone want to achieve? The writer don’t need to indentify him/herself period, we must understand the political behavior of ministers who doesn’t have no intention to fix your issues or plight they will be all out to flip your words. That being said the content quoted above can be similarly be written by a politician who want to present him/herself as a neutral person but STILL there is no substance to say they are prepared to do anything rather, it becomes a political wording warfare. This is stupidity to its best. What I can say is that the residents can cry all the wanted there plight will NOT be addressed because it has now evolved into a different level/platform. We don’t have unity on this island it’s a fake representation, get into the core of the unions or cluster you will be surprised of it’s revelation.
This is an islandwide problem. FIX THE DAMN PROBLEM.
I agree with Nigel’s view point. It’s a problem affecting them. A letter was written on behalf of the residents regardless of whether some people knew or not. The writer expr
I agree with Nigel’s . It’s a problem affecting them. A letter was written on behalf of the residents regardless of whether some people knew or not. The writer express his love by taking everyone into Iconsideration being he consider the people of the community as one wrote on their behalf so what’s the big deal. Is the association staying or thinking that the letter had to come from them. Hence goes my thinking that the association is a party hack association. I voted you guys yet I complain on behalf of my community tell me does that make my complains political. Slp is made up of people that are too petty in government and their egos are too much. Every comment made in expressing oneself is considered political. Do the job assigned to you all and let pettiness slide. People have a right to complain and speak up whether it be slp or uwp. Please please if you guys cannot do the work assigned to you all please take a seat and let a new set of serious honest like-minded people who seriously loves people, stlucians and not money do the job. Things are difficult, people are frustrated and stressed out and you guys making it worse. Stop thinking that every expression is directed at you all party . If something is wrong stlucians let’s express it whether we be slp/uwp and whether it be slp/uwp in power. Hilliard please take a chill pill. You were doing good not responding to every criticism but it looks like you are back stirring the pot. Please focus on what you need to do and how to improve it. As for the association yes you are a few representing the community but what’s the big deal in getting involved And making such comment when you know the writer did not say anything wrong. I suppose this group is one that are in the pockets of slp because most of those benefits from slp are their friends and family. Those of us who truly love stlucia let’s continue to pray that God protect us and do what is best for us. Peace
Loud music is a health issue, a nuisance and a problem. If you want to smoke, go right ahead. No one else should be affected. This is why there are no smoking signs in all sorts of places. Keep your health destroying habit to yourself. The same way second hand smoke is regulated second hand music should be regulated, Keep your music to yourself and those in your establishment. Problem solved. If anyone who is not your customer is subject to it lower it.
@papa well said, no one will know or have to know who is who. It is blowing out of proportion.
I am LMAO. The second letter makes the same complaints as the first. So, what was the point of addressing the first letter? What was the objective of the second letter? Was it to make the point about noise pollution (which the first did)? Was it to attack the first letter which made the same complaint? Was it political?