Feinstein Group Responds to PM’s Letter to the Unions

Earlier this week, Prime Minister John Briceño addressed a letter from N.T.U.C.B. President Luke Martinez concerning the compulsory acquisition of Stake Bank Island Extension. In his response, the Prime Minister reminded the National Trade Union Congress of Belize that the dispute between the private sector parties is currently before the High Court. He went on to say, “completing a berthing facility in the Belize District is uncontestably in the public interest, such compelling interest recognized by Stake Bank Enterprise Limited, Mister Michael Feinstein and the Government in the Definitive Agreement, and the National Assembly with the passage of the Stake Bank Cruise Docking Facility Act of 2014 and its subsequent amendment of 2017”.  Prime Minister Briceño emphasized the critical importance of completing the Stake Bank project to reverse the current decline in cruise tourism arrivals. He highlighted that this initiative is important for revitalizing the economic activity associated with this crucial subsector.  On Thursday, Senator Glenfield Dennison, representing the trade unions, informed reporters about a conflict between the pieces of legislation being used to acquire the parcels of land in question.  Following Dennison’s revealing interview, the Feinstein Group has swiftly issued a statement addressing the prime minister’s recent letter to the N.T.U.C.B.  Although the Prime Minister’s letter seeks to defend the G.O.B.’s actions, Feinstein says that it is fraught with inconsistencies, misrepresentations, and attempts to mislead the public. Ultimately, it falls short of addressing the fundamental issues of transparency and accountability.  Here’s more from our interview with Senator Dennison.

 

Glenfield Dennison, Union Senator

“I think what’s important for the public to appreciate is that as a social partner, we have done our part to show to the government the other view.  The questions that we raised in our letter go to the root of clarifying whether it’s a public purpose because we are not saying we’re right.  We are saying that if you are clear about what these questions are then you would be sound in your position that it is a public purpose.  So whether or not it is, that’s for Mr. Feinstein and his litigation.  But in my mind and in the view of the Trade Union Congress, it isn’t a public purpose.  They are acquiring it on behalf of the promoter and really, that’s where you trigger the other piece of legislation. I just don’t know that it’s worth the intervention of the government.  I don’t think it’s a simple case before the court, but it’s definitely not a complex issue.  Mr. Feinstein would have had an arrangement with the bank.  It’s really, I don’t want to test the merits or the demerits of it, but that matter is not very complex.  And so, it will be resolved in favor of who is the true owner of the land once that goes through the judicial process.  There’s also the option of doing nothing until that goes through.”

 

Reporter

“Urgency, sir.”

 

Glenfield Dennison

“I get the call for urgency, I don’t share the view.  The situation with the cruise industry has been known for quite a while now and it’s now, all of a sudden, they’ve put Mr. Feinstein through quite a bit and now it’s urgent that the port finishes, you see.”