From John Banks.
AND so the States have given approval, in principle, to the Cohen/Hopkins plans for the Waterfront.

On the face of it the plans to be a good scheme money wise, including a massive bribe of £75 million.

If the scheme is so good, why did the Environment Minister threaten to resign before any decision was made? Was that threatened resignation a form of inducement? There are a few factors that have not yet been released to the people of Jersey, namely:

*Where is all the earth to be dug out of the underground car park, foundations for many buildings and rubble from the planned buried road to be put? St Aubin?

*Presumably neither the underground car park nor the planned massive undenground road will have any traffic fumes.

*How much of the Island’s precious water will be used up in making all the concrete to be poured? (Will there be any hosepipe bans while construction is underway?)

*What will be the carbon footprint of all the traffic involved and lights to be installed? There has been a lot of talk about ‘green’ matters but little action. Presumably, much of the energy (eg, heating and lighting) used in the proposed new buildings will come from solar panels or winds or tides?

*The planned 150-year lease is great for the lessee but maybe a bit of a risk for the lessor, bearing climate change in mind. Presumably the States Members who voted for the development are satisfied that the Island may not be too hot, cold, wet or dry for any human occupation in 50 years from now, let alone 150 years?

Maybe much of the above will come out when the planning application is made. In the meantime has there been a cover-up?

It is a pity that people arriving at the harbour will see a heavily built-up area, so common to all harbours the world over, rather than a park, and green space, which would have been so unique, but in this day and age, money is God and must transcend all other considerations.
Kathmuir,
Rue de la Blanche Pierre,
St Lawrence.