Prime Minister Gaston Browne Explains Denial of Sandals’ Overwater Bungalow Request

1. I agree with the Prime Minister on this decision. Our beaches are the national resource, and national pleasure, for Antigua citizens. We all collectively own these beaches together, and we must take care of them together.

   Letting a hotel destroy natural beach beauty is not good public policy, and not the way to achieve economic development.

   I don’t agree with the PM on most things, but on this decision, I agree with him.

   • Agreed @Rastaman81

2. I concur with Prime Minister Browne and this is certainly a common sense approach to the Sandals request. Dickenson Bay is a beach that is widely used not just by the hoteliers and tourists but by local residences alike. While overwater bungalows might be a thing for the future, I think that environmental consideration and its possible impact on the citizenry using the beaches must be taken into account. One of the things that I am forever proud of, is the rights of every Antiguan and Barbudan to our beaches. I salute V C Bird and others who made this possible and whatever happens in our future, and I hope that this privilege is never taken from us.
   I support the idea of over water bungalows as an innovative addition to our tourism product but not in areas that would negatively impact the environment and the rights of our citizens.

3. true true we dnt need that over water bungalow what if something happens an it collapse on person kmt I agree with the Minister the beach doesn’t belong to tourist

4. If “Rastaman81” and “Audley Phillip” were to go at Dickenson Bay and see the new waterbungalows being built by the new Royalton sister hotel, I do not think that they would chat fast again!!

   That is the reason why Sandals made a request as well.

   But being fair-minded on this issue, Sandals is located pretty much centralized of dickenson bay, hence building such water bungalows would hamper, the use of the beach by locals and other foreign visitors visiting the beach itself or having water activities.

   • Did you ever the same sight you are concerned about when the Halcyon Cove was in operation. It’s important at all times to be encouraged in ensuring that you have the facts correctly before making any judgments on others who have a different viewpoint.

     • I assure you, that a restaurant built over the water some 50 years ago is totally different than having bungalows built over water in the 2000s, with heavy traffic in both water and on sand, and these same bungalows are to have privacy and security of its residents well-being, and also with hotels claiming tooo much interference from locals and et al. I have not even started to write the list of now-a-days issues of such for you and any one with different POV to contemplate.

       But let me cut it short and return again to my earlier POV.

       Go down to Royalton at Deep Bay, scrutinize the bungalows and their locality.

       Then . . . drive over to Dickenson Bay, scrutinize the new sister hotel of Royalton in de north-end karna of Dickenson Bay, and scrutinize their locality…. now glance bout a likkle further south and “mindfully dream” of putting X number of bungalows stretching from Sandals land property going into the said water or near the said ole restaurant . . . now wake up!!

       I am not a supporter of the (P)anty (M)an and his cronies. Yes, he and Pussie-Salad (aka Pine-Mango, The Gallery, and Non-biblical James Club) has an axe to grind with Sandals. Yes, maybe its because nothing ($) passing above the table. But for heaven’s sake, sometimes he does have valid points that makes you think twice. At least give him that.

       Any ways . . . I garn take a walk and swim across dickenson bay, deep bay, and every spot that have bungalows.

5. The curious George that I am, I wonder what Sandals is not bowing to. Talk about protecting the environment is sweet sounding nothing. Does Barbuda have environmental issues to consider in its development?

6. It’s the same location that Halcyon Cove used to operate a restaurant is the same location that the new operators are now enhancing? If it’s so, it never hinder beach access and goers. To compare this with what Sandals is requesting is beyond ridiculous. Why can we be objective?

7. The PM think we are all stupid? When he speaks about protecting the environment,is he serious ? YIda,was allowed to do as they please with our mangroves. I do support not to allow the hotels to do this ,but it must be for all and not your chosen friends .

8. I mean, he’s right. But he also hates Sandals lol. They just had big conflict the other year.

9. Let’s be real about this, Sandals was denied because they are not paying the under the table money that all these other companies are willing to pay the government to do business, sandals not with the under table dealing’s, bout environmental risk and access smh, since when the government care about us? That same structure for halcyon been there how long? No environmental damage right? No obstruction of using the beach right? Sometimes I wonder about yall gullible self.

   • This….

10. That refurbished hotel formerly known as Halcyon.Are there any over the water cottages? Why did you give the okay to Royalton and turned down Sandals.

11. And Halcyon is building over the water bungalows as we speak. They are under construction right now “So what’s good for the goose is not good for the gander “ just saying

Comments are closed.