Reclaiming Our Capital City Port of Spain

Our capital city, Port of Spain (POS), is losing its place as the capital of the nation, and the current government appears to have no interest in maintaining POS as a beautiful space filled with high standards.  At the last Diwali celebration, the Prime Minister invited U.S. representatives to her personal home instead of the official residence. Small as it seemed, this moment highlighted a bigger problem, which to me is the Prime Minister’s continued attempt to disassociate with the capital city.  This was once a vibrant hub of politics, business, and culture, and it now faces aging roads, neglected buildings, and fewer people living in the city center.

Based on a 2019 planning report UN-Habitat, the city of Port of Spain has about 48,000 people compared to about 94,000 in 1962.  At that time, the city was a place to visit because it was filled with entertainment and restaurants.  Today, Port of Spain is a place where people are afraid to be once it is dark.  Port of Spain must be restored as long as it is the capital city, or change the capital, especially if you wish to make our new capital San Fernando, Chaguanas, or Siparia.

In 2016, Afra Raymond commented on his website that “our capital has been severely depopulated in the past 50 years”.  He further commented that: “Given that there has been no natural disaster, war or plague, it is sobering to consider this steady population loss and its causes during that period of relative peace and prosperity.”

While there are several things that need to be done to reestablish POS, it would be effective if we began by focusing on improving the quality of the roads.  Secondly, there are several buildings that should be restored and/or redesigned to attract more residents to the city. These priorities are mutually connected. Without good roads, life and business in the city are difficult. Without well-maintained buildings, the city loses its character. Without residents, it becomes just a place of offices rather than a living community.

Roads are the lifeblood of any city. Congestion, potholes, and poor maintenance make commuting frustrating for residents and visitors. Upgrading streets would improve daily life and show that the capital is valued.

Buildings carry history and identity. From the Red House to the Magnificent Seven, near Queen’s Park Savannah, Port of Spain has architectural treasures. Many are deteriorating or underused. Renovating them would preserve heritage, boost civic pride, and attract visitors.

Port of Spain should not be only an administrative center. It should be the heart of Trinidad and Tobago — a place where people live, work, and enjoy city life. By improving roads, restoring buildings, and bringing more residents back to the city, Port of Spain can reclaim its status and vibrancy. Either invest in improving our capital city or let us vote on selecting a new capital city.  Whichever is selected, the bottom line is that POS needs to be upgraded by the Government.

Fariness necessary in Sandals deal …

The return of Sandals to the headlines, through the recent statement by Minister Stuart Young SC, is a reminder that we’ve learned little from the mistakes of the past. As someone who once served as Chairman of the Tourism Development Company (TDC), I speak from personal experience. I was asked to resign from that post—not because I had done anything wrong, but because I stood by a simple, fair principle: that whatever incentives and benefits were offered to Sandals should also be made available to local hoteliers and guesthouse owners.

When I refused to resign on principle, I was advised by the then Minister of Finance to cite “family matters” as my reason, or as he put it, to “take one for the boys.” I rejected both suggestions. I had done nothing wrong.

What I had done was advocate for fairness and transparency in tourism development. Unfortunately, that advocacy was inconvenient to the powers pushing the Sandals deal. The now-infamous Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), exposed thanks to Afra Raymond’s successful legal challenge, showed a lopsided agreement. The state was to fund and build the resort on public land, while Sandals would enjoy sweeping concessions—tax holidays, duty-free status, unlimited work permits for foreigners, and no obligations to local employment. All risk, all cost, all burden—carried by the public.

Is that development, or is it a handover?

The rejection of the project by Tobagonians was not arbitrary. As THA Chief Secretary Farley Augustine noted, it was undemocratic, economically unsound, and environmentally questionable. The proposed site—No Man’s Land—is a Ramsar-listed wetland. Yet, to date, there has been no public disclosure about environmental safeguards or updated assessments.

Development cannot happen in darkness. It cannot bypass stakeholders or sideline local businesses. If we are to believe that lessons have been learned, then this new approach must:

  1. Ensure full transparency, including the release of all agreements before they are finalized.
  2. Require rigorous environmental scrutiny.
  3. Treat local hoteliers and guesthouses with the same regard as international chains.
  4. Involve real public and stakeholder consultation—not after the fact, but from the start.

Tourism is critical to Tobago’s future, but not on any terms and certainly not at any cost. Fairness and public accountability should not be punished—they should be the minimum standard. The core elements that shape a successful and sustainable tourism experience are Culture, Conversation and Community.  Are these 3 C’s included in the Sandals meeting of April 7?

Feb 7, 2017 – Letter to Prime Minister Dr. Rowley

This is one of the letters which I have written to
Prime Minister Rowley over the past 5 years. 

Dear Prime Minister

Happy Carnival to you?

This is your 17th month as the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago and you are still underperforming in my survey of one.

I am particularly interested in us making positive strides in the area of tourism as a vehicle for diversification of the economy.  In the short term, there are few quick wins but much can be done in the medium to long term.  Here are two suggestions:

  1. Publicise the terms and conditions being given to Sandals and offer the identical terms and conditions to all potential investors in building new plant.
    (This will serve to mute any dissenting voices about lack of transparency, favouritism and back room dealings).
  2. Ensure that Sandals or their representatives begin the EIA process publicly leading to the publication of the final EIA when it is granted.
    (This will demonstrate your commitment to minimising long term environmental impacts and demonstrate your further commitment to transparency and accountability.)

Yours for our country!

Dennise Demming (Mrs.)
MBA, BSc., Cert-Mass Comm
Concerned Citizen