Cruise and cargo port debates revive development questions

As Grand Cayman considers separate port projects – one for cargo and another for cruise tourism – island stakeholders are weighing in on the potential impacts. The port concepts have revived old talking points and pre-pandemic debate about the islands’ infrastructure.

Tortuga Rum Company released a statement in support of government’s proposed referendum, announced 31 July, to determine the public’s stance on pursuing a cruise berthing facility on island. The company was also a supporter of pursuing a cruise port project before the people-initiated referendum on the topic was abandoned in 2020.

The renewed referendum effort, initiated this time by government, has been characterised as an effort to measure public interest in the cruise industry and is not tied to a specific project proposal. The referendum’s date and wording have yet to be released.

Tortuga welcomed the new referendum as a democratic effort to engage Caymanian voters.

“The enhancement of our cruise port is not just about infrastructure; it is about securing the future of our economy and preserving the jobs and businesses that depend on cruise tourism,” said Tortuga Rum Company CEO Eugene Nolan in a press release.

“With the ability to safely accommodate larger ships and reduce the environmental footprint, through reduced emissions and fuel consumption, we would not only be improving the efficiency of our port but also enhancing the quality of experience for our visitors.”

The company referred to tourism as “a cornerstone of the Cayman Islands’ economy” that has been hit by a decline in cruise passenger arrivals since the islands’ reopening after the COVID-19 shutdown.

Tourism Minister Kenneth Bryan has warned that cruise ship arrivals to Grand Cayman will continue to decline without a pier to support larger ships.

Referendum timing

Following Tortuga’s statement, CPR Cayman, an integral player in bringing forth the abandoned people-initiated referendum, questioned the justification for reviving a referendum now.

“The Covid-19 pandemic clearly demonstrated the inherent risks and volatility of the cruise line industry and the need for Cayman to strike a careful balance in developing a sustainable cruise tourism sector focused on quality high spending visitors, which does not compromise the environment which much of that tourism is based on,” CPR Cayman wrote in a public statement.

“A Government initiated referendum is not binding on current or future Governments and without a pressing need for a referendum at present and no projects or agendas on the table, we do not see that there is justification for a referendum in 2024.”

CPR also questioned the cost of a referendum, “at a time when so many Caymanians are struggling with the soaring cost of living, housing and traffic”.

Cabinet has approved $1.2 million in additional funding for the Elections Office to support the referendum.

“If the Government determines that this referendum question should be asked, it would be better use of the people’s resources to hold the referendum at the same time as the 2025 general elections. Holding the referendum at the same time as the general election would also allow greater participation and a wider number of citizens having the opportunity to have their say on the important issue,” CPR Cayman said.

The announcement of the referendum on 31 July came a month after the voter registration deadline, meaning voters registering now would not be eligible to vote if the referendum is held before the end of the year.

“As we quickly approach the end of August, we are concerned why there is such a rush to hold the referendum, and particularly concerned that the lack of notice will exclude all eligible voters not already registered to vote,” CPR wrote.

The organisation has also called for “stringent and fair campaign financing regulations” to be established for the vote.

Cargo port debate

Meanwhile, government is also mulling the options to relocate George Town’s cargo port away from the waterfront, currently divided between cruise and commercial demands.

Government shared a series of options to move the cargo facility, including several possibilities at Breakers, at the beginning of the month. 

The National Trust for the Cayman Islands released a statement Tuesday, urging government “to add a ‘do maximum’ option at the current George Town site based on managed population growth of 150,000 rather than the 250,000 figure currently used as a basis for the report”.

Government did not include the option to remain in George Town among its publicly released proposals earlier this month. The National Trust is requesting officials reconsider the possibility of expanding the George Town facility, rather than building a new port elsewhere.

“The current business case includes two options for the George Town port, ‘do nothing’ and ‘do minimum’,” the National Trust said.

“The NTCI feels that a ‘do maximum’ option should be included which improves the current site so that it could support a more realistic population level capped at 150,000.”

The National Trust expressed concern about the environmental impact on terrestrial and marine life if construction is pursued near the Breakers quarries.

“We would like Government to take a cautious, data-driven approach to the port expansion and advocate for full transparency, including an Environmental Impact Assessment before any construction begins,” said National Trust chair Melanie Carmichael. 

“We also strongly believe that the population scenarios considered for the port should be applied across all government projects including development planning, waste management and transport so that there is more correlation between these large capital projects which will have an enormous environmental, social and economic impact on all three islands.”

The National Trust has asked government to consider different population growth scenarios beyond the current business outline case’s projection of 250,000 people by 2084, calling the growth rate “unsustainable” and “undesirable”.