The Tribune

Should Marsh Harbour be moved inland?

That’s a question being raised by Iram Lewis, the State Minister for Disaster Reconstruction, as efforts to rebuild after Hurricane Dorian continue.

“When you talk about redesigning Marsh Harbour,” he said, “one of the things that immediately comes to mind is that you must shift the town centre more inland.”

Such a move would of course be far from easy – between land rights and agreements and people’s feelings about wanting to stay where they have been for years. Already, Mr Lewis says terminal buildings at Marsh Harbour dock are being demolished and will be moved further away from the seafront to a more elevated area.

The challenge comes with talking to so many private citizens about relocating. Mr Lewis says a discussion “must be had” with landowners – although he did not suggest when that would be taking place.

The truth is such a discussion might be one that other parts of The Bahamas might well need to have if predictions about climate change hold true.

In November, The Tribune published research that showed that rising seas are expected to have worse impact than previously known – with most of Grand Bahama, Abaco and Spanish Wells projected to be under flood levels by 2050 because of climate change.

Much of Crooked Island, Acklins, Andros and Cat Island are also projected to be under flood levels, according to projections by Climate Central, a non-profit organisation that reports climate science news. As for New Providence? Eastern and South-Eastern parts of the island are also projected to be at risk.

So as the government approaches the prospect of moving the Marsh Harbour community, its actions now could well serve as a lesson for the rest of The Bahamas – how to do it right if all goes well or what to avoid if things don’t go smoothly.

Of course there are concerns – the government hasn’t seemed to ensure the best lines of communication with those affected by Hurricane Dorian, which doesn’t bode terribly well for talks.

Another example of that miscommunication was on show yesterday, with Mr Lewis asked when the list of pledges from last month’s pledging conference would be made public. He responded to say that “there was no secret with respect to the pledging conference itself. It was wide open for everyone to be there to take pictures and to record… I’m sure that all the information that needs to be had is available to the public”.

Well, Mr Lewis, that’s not what was promised by Katherine Forbes-Smith, the managing director of the Bahamas Disaster Reconstruction Authority, who said that a full breakdown of all pledges would be made “soon”. That “soon” has never arrived, so no, “all the information that needs to be had” is not yet available to the public.

More than that, when one voice in the reconstruction effort says one thing and another says something different, that’s the kind of communication problem that causes disgruntlement with the government’s approach – and that’s what needs to be avoided in any talks about uprooting a community and relocating it.

So should Marsh Harbour be moved inland? That’s not for us to say, but rather for every member of the community there to be able to have their say. The desire for talks on the subject is good – but let’s make sure that miscommunications don’t get in the way.

Domes available at last

What’s happening with the domes planned as temporary housing in Abaco?

The plan to put up domes to offer shelter to victims of Hurricane Dorian seems to be ever shifting. First it was to be a large dome city, and now the domes are being offered around to put up on people’s properties.

First, the good – 32 domes at the Spring City site in Abaco are to be available to residents on Thursday, according to Disaster Reconstruction Authority chairman John-Michael Clarke. That date had slipped a couple of times so it’s good to see it finally happening – assuming nothing changes this week.

It’s also good to see the government being responsive and, as Mr Clarke puts it, nothing that “we want to put the domes where people want the domes”.

Now for the bad – the rest is a little muddled. One of the advantages of having the “dome city” is that it allowed support services to be concentrated in one spot – which will not be the case with domes being distributed elsewhere. A total of 32 domes will not go far either – so we hope that people will not be caught in between the shelters being closed down and the domes being available.

Mr Clarke says just under 300 people are still in shelters – and there are of course others living temporarily with families or in rented accommodation elsewhere.

In the end, we all want the same – people being given the best chance to rebuild their lives as well as their homes. We hope at last that people taking occupancy of domes this week will be a step on that path.