Bryan: Referendum will be a simple question: Cayman News Service

(CNS): Tourism Minister Kenneth Bryan says the referendum recently approved by Cabinet will be a very simple question asking citizens whether they want the country to build cruise ship berthing facilities. The vote will not address where such facilities should be built, how they should be funded, whether they should include highland development or whether cruise lines should be involved. Bryan says those are issues that the next government will need to deal with.

The current tourism minister said once the country gives its approval or disapproval to the development of any type of berthing facilities, all other issues can be discussed. Bryan hinted that the issue is whether the country continues to cater to cruise tourism because without some kind of marina, the large ships will not come anymore.

Speaking recently on Cayman Radio, he claimed that this has had an adverse impact on the wider economy and government coffers. Bryan promised that before the vote, expected in October or November, he would present the country with a proper economic analysis of what it would mean if Cayman decided it did not want any form of cruise ship terminal facility, and what future government actions would need to take to help businesses that rely on the industry transition to cater to overnight visitors.

However, the Tourism Minister is clearly hoping that by asking such a simple question and suggesting that the project is likely to be a very basic marina with no upland development and minimal environmental damage, people will be more likely to vote ‘yes.’ But if voters do so, they will be doing so without any indication of what will happen after the vote.

If people support the principle of a “basic pier”, and if it proves feasible, a future government might implement a major and complex project without a referendum, with partners who have no concern for the best interests of the jurisdiction. Such a project might only benefit a few seaside businesses and some larger tourism operators, as is the case with the PPM government’s proposal.

However, Bryan said he believes that until people can give a simple “yes” or “no” answer to the principle of cruise infrastructure, a discussion about next steps cannot take place.

“We need to have an answer to one thing. Let’s not get hung up on cost, location, design and all the other things. Let’s just find out from the people whether you want a marina,” he said, explaining how he and his team and caucus concluded a simple question first was the best way forward.

Bryan claims Grand Cayman could do with just a simple marina because it wouldn’t need to accommodate more than two giant ships at a time. So he wants to get a sense of what people think of the basic idea first. If people want it, then the next government can start thinking about a host of other issues, especially financing and the environment. He says a simple marina could be financed through an investment fund unique to the Cayman Islands.

Brian now seems convinced that the cruise lines have drastically reduced their calls here and eventually the major routes will cease service altogether, and if that is the case, and it is hoped, the government needs to have a plan.

“One of the key features of this referendum is that once the decision is made, the government can make plans no matter what the outcome is,” he said. “It can be a sensitive area but we have to discuss it because if the answer is no and it’s the people’s choice, then at least the next government will know that the people don’t want this and what you do when the numbers continue to fall.”

The tourism minister spoke of the need to review immigration policy and even suspend work permits in the tourism industry if Cayman was to exit cruise tourism until locals working in the tourism industry and local small business owners serving the cruise industry transitioned to the overnight market.

Many in the Cayman Islands tourism industry have said the cruise industry provides little benefit to the wider population. Accommodation tourism has also come under criticism as the market landscape changes with the rise of Airbnb and its impact on the environment and infrastructure.

Yet it still contributes more to the local economy than the cruise industry, which is increasingly driven by mega-ships and companies that do their best to turn ports of call into ever-changing backdrops for the “onboard destinations” they market.

Meanwhile, businessmen who stand to benefit most from the marina have also begun to weigh in, trying to convince the rest of the country to support the construction of the berthing facility to increase profits. Local liquor stores and well-known cake maker Tortuga Rum Company welcomed the government’s decision to hold the national referendum in a press release on Monday.

“Improving our cruise port is not only about infrastructure, it’s about securing the future of our economy and maintaining the jobs and businesses that rely on cruise tourism,” said Eugene Nolan, CEO of Tortuga Rum. He noted that many people working in the tourism industry directly benefit from cruise tourism — a hotly debated issue.

“The importance of this subject is underscored by the significant drop in cruise passenger numbers since Cayman reopened its borders following the pandemic, with no signs of a full rebound,” he said, claiming that “the benefits of a cruise berthing facility extend far beyond the immediate economic impact”.

Opponents of the pier’s construction, however, point out that the negative impacts from cruise ships far outweigh the very limited benefits to Caymanians.

“Investment in upgrading cruise tourism facilities will ensure that the Cayman Islands remains a top destination for cruise tourists, which in turn will support local businesses, from water sports and tour operators to restaurants and retailers across the island,” Nolan said. He added that his boss believed that developing the cruise port was “vital to the future prosperity of our islands,” but this statement was strongly disputed.