Moderator: Bennette Roach
(First part of introduction missing from tape)
B. Roach: ….and we invite you if you are unsure about anything, if you want some information on anything that they may have said to you in the past, you want some clarification – in a few minutes, in about 15 minutes time after we would have done some background discussion on the topic – the phone lines will be open and you are invited to call in. The number is 491-7227. If you are calling from overseas, if we are blessed enough and fortunate enough, if you are blessed enough and fortunate enough to be hearing us in any of the neighboring islands, then you would have to dial 1-664-491-7227.
Welcome again and I say good evening to these gentlemen who I will ask Mr. Jim Bass to introduce.
J. Bass: Good evening listeners. We are happy to be here, the CRM, (the Committee for the Re-Development of Montserrat. Going around from my left is Mr. Vernon White, the former Director of Works, one of our civil engineers; and there’s Mr. Bertrand Burke, who was formerly the Chief Surveyor of Montserrat and is still the senior surveyor on island. We have Mr. Hylroy Bramble, our secretary/treasurer; Mr. Julian Romeo, the coordinator of our public relations; and Mr. Rupert Isles, a businessman and one of our members. Good night and we are here to take your questions with respect to the issues that our committee has raised over the last couple of weeks in respect of the so-called temporary airport at Geralds.
B. Roach: Jim, perhaps we can get right into the meat of it. People will know that as far back and I think it was 1998 – somebody has a copy of the Gibb report. Can you tell what date it was? I think I get mixed up with it being 1998 or 99.
J. Bass: Yes, the Gibb report was in 98.
BR: Yes, the middle of 98, I think it was – when we had some discussions and consultations with the public here in Montserrat regarding the options of the construction of an airport. We are at a stage here where we know that we had discussed Blakes, they had discussed Geralds, they had discussed – they were not supposed to we understood after a while – Thatch Valley. And then there was this fourth option which was a last minute thing, where the back to Bramble situation came up.
We know that we eventually headed … or there was an agreement on the part of our government and people to return to Geralds but for the volcano interceding again, if you like, for us and giving us early warning, that whole matter has been scrapped. And now the scientists are saying, like they have always said I’ll remind you, that it is not known, in the foreseeable, when the volcano will say, “I’ve had enough. See you in the next 300 years or in the next 30 years, as the scientists say is likely to happen.” So that threw that out.
We knew that there were plans, even with the use of the Bramble Airport, to build a temporary airstrip at Geralds along with the main structures being an upgraded and an updated and modern, sports-complex facility, which would have housed or carried a temporary grass strip to be used in the case of need. And we know that now, that has all changed and recently – I’ll just read for you and then somebody from the CRM will comment on their understanding of what was being said.
We know that Dr. Lewis, on this very radio station in an interview with the station manager, acting manager said, “So we are proceeding with the understanding that if the investigations which are necessary prove the area to be safe that we will proceed.” And I’ll leave that right there and we will take it from there. And I think, gentlemen, that this posed some concern to you as being the persons who are kind of being the watchdog as to what happens with an airport in Montserrat.
J. Bass: Basically what we are saying is that even if Geralds was deemed to be safe, the length of the runway is grossly inadequate. We are saying that, and we keep saying that Montserrat has a future and we cannot base our future on the carrying capacity of the only type of aircraft that can be accommodated at Geralds, which would have to be a 9-seater Britten Islander aircraft. The idea of a Twin Otter has been ruled out on the basis of the report submitted by the ICAO, (the International Civil Aviation Organisation) expert, Mr. Vreendenburgh, in his recently submitted report.
We read in our last discussion, in the interview that we had on Radio Montserrat, we read part of his report in July when he said that “the proposed runway length of 500 meters is insufficient for operations of the design aircraft, Twin Otter, in conventional mode with a full payload on the Antigua-Montserrat sector, no refueling available, elevation of 550 feet, temperature of 32 degrees centigrade, …” etc., etc. So that basically what he is saying is that the runway length of 500 meters is insufficient to accommodate a fully loaded Twin Otter aircraft. So what we can reasonably expect to have going back and forth, servicing this island will be the 9-seater, Britten Islander. That’s what it comes down to.
And we are saying that given the need to properly develop this country, we cannot settle for a runway that can only take an Islander aircraft. We need a runway that is extendable, that can initially accommodate the Dash aircraft, or the American Eagle, or similar aircraft. This is where we have to start.
B. Roach: Why is it necessary, you think – Why can’t we accept the Twin Otter that comes in with – I am being the devil’s advocate because this is not something that I would accept for myself. But why can’t we accept a Twin Otter coming in, not with a full payload, but it will bring 18 people, not with all the baggage, not with all the fuel, and so on? And let me also ask, does this mean … are we understanding that when that happens, the ferry goes out the door and the emergency helicopter goes out the door?
J. Bass: Well, we understood that the ferry goes out the door based on the discussions that we had with the consultants when they came here last to assess the transportation. But the Twin Otter is not adequate and apart from that, the main thing is that the 500 meters would be dangerous even if it were to accommodate the Twin Otter, because in case of a burst tyre or the loss of an engine – which I indicated there during the last interview that we had – for 500 meters, which is 1650 feet, you can’t properly accommodate a Twin Otter on that, safely because if an engine goes at the point of takeoff, it needs much, much more in order for it to stop within safe limits. I gave the example that the experience that I had – W. H. Bramble was 3600 feet, usable area or usable length, more 3200 as King Lee insists all the time. And when an engine went, at the point of takeoff when I was on that aircraft, full loaded, it just managed to stop at the very end of the runway. If that were to happen on a 500-meter runway, which is 1650 feet, somebody is dead.
J. Romeo: I’d like to add to that. I’m sorry that Mr. Cedric Osborne wasn’t here because he is in the hotel industry. But let’s just even speak for Montserratians in general, that in December gone, there was a special flight put on by Montserratians who came from England and from my recollection, it was several dumper truck loads William Wall had to make down to the ferry to bring up their baggage. We know that Montserratians who are on the outside who do plan to come home are not going to come home with 20 pounds. When they do come home, they come with things to bless their friends with, their family with. And if they were to come in the way they came in, in December, it would mean a Twin Otter would have to make several trips in that day – well, not just in that day because it was over 100 people that came – and it will have to make several trips and that does not include, necessarily, baggage because they would not be able to come in with a full payload. And we know the problems we’ve had in Antigua with pilferage. We know the problems, we’ve had of not getting our baggage. We know the problems and if you look at it, how often have you heard these days since the ferry has been running, that there has been a problem with baggage? Except for American Airlines making a mistake and not transferring your baggage to some other flight? Besides that, believe you me, nobody has complained really about baggage since the ferry has been running.
J. Romeo: Mind you we are having like 20% of the number of people that we used to get per year coming in. But if you don’t just take the Christmas scenario because perhaps one will argue that, well you really can’t base any argument just on that. Yes. And let’s try not to be sentimental about that. What would an airport do for Montserrat? Why is it that just something that can take out from here to Antigua … What does an airstrip do for Montserrat? What do we want to tell people? What do we want to tell people that an an airstrip or an airport that can accommodate appropriate, bigger, satisfactory baggage and all of that coming in – what does that do for us? I mean, why this great concern?
H. Bramble: Bennette, what we are looking at at Geralds is a temporary airstrip that can in no way enhance our entire economic viability. We are looking for an airstrip that can afford us some kind of economic viability. We have a product to sell here in Montserrat and that is the volcano and the devastation of Plymouth, etc. And out of the adversity of the volcano we can definitely build a good tourism product. Could a 9-seater aircraft enhance this product? No. So immediately, we’ll be left behind in that section.
Let us go back to W&W Electronics who did assembly-type manufacturing and had to be shipping out, on a regular basis – and all Montserratians know that the reason why W&W left or one of the main reasons why they left – was they had a problem with shipping. Therefore, we need to have an airstrip that could afford us the right type of aircraft that would take out finished products back to Antigua to go on the international market, wherever it is. We need to have raw materials in so that when we create the type of jobs that require these materials that we’ll have the material available, and then ship the finished product out again.
So an airstrip in Geralds of 500-meter length would in no way enhance our whole economic outlook in Montserrat.
J. Romeo: Bennette, one of the things I want to add to that is: besides the economic viability, it’s important for us to send a message to the rest of the world that Montserrat is safe, that Montserrat is a destination that people could come to. Let’s not continue with this temporary thing, makeshift, whatever.
B. Roach: Julian, the temporary airstrip is going to take some two years to build, how does this compare with any of the other options? And we will try in a very few moments, to touch on what CRM think is an alternative, a safe alternative, because we will be fair to all the studies and everything that the people who are promoting the temporary airstrip – that safety is one of the things that they consider and what we wish to promote. That, that will always take place first before we go any further.
R. Isles: I would add to that by saying that the Geralds airstrip would be taking 2 years to build. We are basing on the Old Quaw strip that I know that I can have that airport built in two years although it’s about 3 times or more the length, simply because we have no noise pollution factor, no dust pollution, no traffic. We can do blasting or equipment can work without interfering with anyone or anything. Someone spoke of borings. There were no borings done at Geralds; we don’t have to do borings over there either. What we are doing there is taking off some pyramids and compacting them in the lower areas which would go much faster than removing stuff from Geralds because there was no test done on any of these sites to know what’s underneath there. With 40 million dollars, I can have Old Quaw, to plus or minus one-inch in two years.
B. Roach: Before we get over to the Old Quaw situation, is it fair perhaps to say that the government has agreed to build an airstrip at Geralds? Is that a fair comment to say that they have agreed to build an airstrip at Geralds, when in fact what they’ve said is that “we are proceeding with the understanding that if the investigations which are necessary prove the area to be safe.” Is it fair to say that? Or, can we think – because I think your position is that you – one of your main objections is that there is no way that Geralds will ever be proved safe?
J. Bass: Yes and apart from that, once her majesty’s government spends 40 million dollars and I’m using the figure that Italian company used. They said 39 million, four hundred thousand dollars, or thereabout. So call it 40 million. Once the British government spends 40 million or facilitates the expenditure of 40 million dollars at any site for any so-called temporary airport. That is it. It will be permanent. And to me, it’s just basic common sense.
B. Roach: Are you of the opinion that you might even see then – because taking that you feel that the place is unsafe and they have already said they are willing to spend the money, it being permanent or temporary or whatever – based on your own judgment and your feelings and your own studies and your own investigations, do you think we will see an airstrip at Geralds?
J. Romeo: I really don’t think we will ever see an airstrip in Geralds. But let me just add to that. I can’t safely say that the government of Montserrat has decided to go to Geralds simply because my philosophy is always: governments are put up by their people. I could say that the PLM Party has decided to put an airstrip in Geralds but they have not gotten the blessings of the people of Montserrat.
B. Roach: On what do you base that statement which seems to be …. ?
J. Romeo: Because the Gibb report, when it was done, they did some sort of sociological study and the environmental studies to find out what the impacts are going to be like and most Montserratians in the study said they did not want an airstrip in Geralds. They had more been inclined to go for Thatch Valley. It was overwhelming, the last meeting that Gibb had at Geralds in the Defence Force building. I was there. And I remember, the very chief minister now, to some extent, if most people were there recall, supported to some extent, an airport in Thatch Valley.
I know, to some extent, the government’s full heart is not in it. I believe that and at the same time, the people of Montserrat have not been given an opportunity to discuss.
B. Roach: If there heart is not it, if there heart is not in the construction of an airstrip at Geralds, Julian, what is it that is forcing … or, what is it that is causing them to lean in that direction?
J. Romeo: I think they have been hijacked, hijacked by an agency that has told them, basically, do or die. If you don’t accept Geralds, basically you will suffer the consequences.
B. Roach: Very good and with that we can move on I think perhaps to what you are probably suggesting as an alternative. And one of the factors that have been thrown at me as I’ve asked questions on this issue is that in deed, none of the options, none of the proposed sites (and I think that’s something that the good doctor used. He talked about the potential and the proposed, the proposed and the potential) – that none of the proposed sites, in fact, is yet known to be safe. He also went on in that interview to talk about for any airport to be commercially sanctioned and so on, it has to undergo some studies for 5 years before it is constructed, which says that Gerald’s temporary airstrip, if there’s one, will not be sanctioned for commercial use, so that Montserrat will never have – You’ll never see on any travel thing anywhere from St. Kitts to Montserrat; it will always be to Antigua and then the rest has to be sorted out.
Now, this is what one of the consultants said: “A new proposal for an alternative site for aerodrome development at Old Quaw is not considered feasible due to its reduced usability, due to the crosswind component which would have a significant impact on operations, in particular during the initial development stage when operations by the smaller and lighter types of aircraft would be adversely affected. For comparative purposes, the reliability of fixed-wing aircraft services at Old Quaw could be less than the present helicopter services.”
Compare that with … given that information and the Geralds information.
B. Burke: Bennette, I think I would address that point because that’s been very puzzling to us in the CRM because nobody did any study at Old Quaw, nobody did any study at Thatch Valley, nobody did any study at Geralds. So I don’t know how this gentleman could be speaking about crosswinds and all this kind of thing. And when it comes to people who actually know these sites, people will tell you that the place where you have all these crosswinds and turbulences is most likely going to be Geralds.
The guy also spoke about alignment or something like that. And I would like the public to know that the alignment of Old Quaw is similar to the whole Bramble airport and it’s certainly much better than the proposed extension realignment, which had it not been for the volcano, we would probably be landing there today.
B. Roach: Are you saying that extended alignment will be worse than any reasonable alignment that would be put in Old Quaw?
B. Burke: Yes, it certainly would be.
B. Roach: What about the argument that there is downdraft and updraft that comes off that extreme southern tip of the island?
B. Burke: Well, the point is: nobody could argue that before you do a wind study and we are, at this stage, trying to organize that.
B. Roach: Listeners, we’d like to let you know that at this point we would like to throw the phone lines open so that you can call in with your questions. We know that we cannot possible touch on the aggravating issues or the questions or answers—I won’t say answer—but certainly, not in the discussion, we will not give you the answers to some of the questions that you want. So please feel free. We are hoping that you will call in and interact with the members of the Committee for the Redevelopment of Montserrat.
B. Burke: Bennette, to continue, the Old Quaw strip was thought up and brought in because of the fact that Thatch Valley, which is the preferred strip, would probably cost somewhere in the region of 200 million.
B. Roach: But you would also have to do some studies at Thatch Valley.
B. Burke: Yes. There would have also had to be studies there?
B. Roach: So why aren’t we having – even from the doctor’s own words here – if we are not sure that Geralds will even be safe as far as the wind and we know that the social impact is highest there at Geralds than any of the other mentioned sites, why aren’t we having a similar study in terms of simulation flights and actual flyovers and so on done at Old Quaw as we’re having, simultaneously with Geralds and the wind studies at Geralds?
J. Romeo: Because, obviously Bennette, I have found out that we are living in a very autocratic society where there is an absolute rule by some forces that the people of Montserrat are not given the opportunity to discuss. And remember, I said already that development is tied to democracy; democracy is tied to discussion; and discussion involves decision-making. And the problem is that our local government, along with DFID, have not given Montserrat the opportunity to sit and discuss those options.
B. Roach: So what you are saying, Julian is that – We just had a program that preceded this where we are hearing private sector development consultants saying that there must be an inclusion where the people must begin to own the things that they are doing – You’re saying that what we have right now runs right against that.
J. Romeo: Runs right against it and goes against the grain of democracy. Any developing society must encourage some level of discussion concerning something like an airport which will be the hub of our economy.
B. Roach: The number to call folks is 491 and that’s in Montserrat is 491-7227. I think Mr. Isles here was going to say something on the issue of the infeasibility of the Old Quaw site.
R. Isles: Yes because I read what the gentleman wrote there and it seems pretty strange to me that the other sites, he’s saying that wind studies must be done. And then on the Old Quaw site, he is saying that there is a crosswind and he was here for only two days, how could he have done a wind study at Old Quaw in 2 days when a wind study is supposed to take one year? And he’s saying that ….
Caller: Good evening. Listening to this program, I’d like to congratulate CRM, anyway for taking a positive stand and attempting to bring this topic to the Montserratian public but I’m a little perturbed by some of the statements that I’m hearing, especially there from young Mr. Romeo.
In the first place, he says that the PLM government has made a decision to do X, Y and Z. That’s a totally unfair statement because I have been on the radio on numerous occasions and in the newspaper. I have stated explicitly that I am totally against the Geralds site and the Geralds airport and I’m a member of the PLM Party. Dr. Lewis has made numerous attempts to explain his position and where he is inside of it. So, I think it’s a very unfair statement.
Now again, he has said that the PLM government or the local government has not attempted to make any discussion on the issue. But here I am listening to you all on the radio discussing the issue, on Radio Montserrat, discussing the issue at length and you discussed the issue at length about 2 weeks ago. There was a whole hour program where you spoke at length on the issue, bringing the issue to the people of Montserrat and yet and still you are saying that ….
B. Roach: Are you suggesting though that it is the government that is – what they are doing is permitting the discussion? In what way have they initiated this discussion?
Caller: The mere fact that the discussion is being done on the radio, number one, must say that government is in some way, form or fashion either facilitating or allowing it to happen.
J. Romeo: Chedmond, I’m ….
Caller: Wait, wait. That’s not the thing. The thing is that we have to attempt to balance, we have to attempt to make a sensible and reasonable balance when things are being done. There are many sides to a story and when a government takes office, it has to attempt to balance between its administrative needs and desires, the people’s needs and desires, the pressures that it has above it. We have to recognize exactly where the government sits in the hierarchy and it has pressure on it from below and it has pressure on it from above. It is not the ultimate, the be-all and the end-all. And then we should recognize that at some point in time, if the government appears to be inadequate, if the government appears to have some short comings, if the government appears not to have the power to say or to do the things that we perceive the people want them to say or do, then it is up to the people to empower that government to do.
I agree with Julian 100%, I agree with CRM a hundred percent. There should be no airstrip at Geralds but if at the end of the day, the government—which I am not sure has happened yet—that the government signs an agreement with DFID to put an airstrip down there and the people, through the empowerment of an organization like CRM rallies and brings the people together and the people en mass, demonstrate against it, then they have empowered the government to tell DFID, the British government and everybody else, the people say, they don’t want it.
This is how these things operate. You cannot expect government alone, by itself all the time to make certain decisions and make them hard and binding.
B. Roach: But caller, how is government facilitating the people to tell them what it is they believe in and what they don’t want and what they want? How is government facilitating that?
Caller: Mr. Roach, I have spoken on the issue on numerous occasions. Dr. Lewis has spoken on the issue on numerous occasions. Are we not members of government? Are we not?
B. Roach: But remember, you have clearly said that you are not in favour of an airstrip at Geralds. However, before the island, what is before the people in Montserrat is an agreement by the government to go ahead with the studies to – if proven acceptable by this and that – to put an airstrip at Geralds. Whereas, the CRM people here are saying and other people are saying that even if an airstrip were to go at Geralds, it’s only 500 meters. It will not do anything to enhance the future of Montserrat, whereas there is another area which lends to development, extension later on, immediate enhancement of the Montserrat situation, where an airport is concerned. But nobody is agreeing, from government, to do any studies in that area.
Caller: Mr. Roach, that’s not true. But I am in total agreement with everything you and CRM have said in terms of non-viability of Geralds, the viability ….
B. Roach: Tell me what is not true.
Caller: What is not true is that nobody is doing anything about facilitating other areas of discussion. The mere fact that you are broaching the topic before it happens -- Look, one of our problems in this country has always been reaction instead pro-action. Right now, CRM is taking a pro-active position. According to all the reports, it’s going to take at least 2 years to get something done down there, right? If now we are being pro-active on the issue, it means that we are two years ahead … the people is two years ahead of -- if the government commits itself and DFID and the rest of them, we are two years ahead of them. And we have two years in which to mobilize. We have two years in which to educate. We have two years to ….
B. Roach: I don’t you are correct. Let’s get that straight. I don’t think you’re correct. I think that once it’s agreed that there will be an airstrip there it will take two years to build the airstrip. I don’t think you are correct because if tomorrow, somebody comes and say, we have done some studies, we think it’s OK, the studies prove its OK….
Caller: OK. Let we accept that we don’t have two years, but let us accept that we are already ahead of the game because we are already in the process of educating, we are already in the process of rejecting, we are already in the process of mobilizing. And I agree with Julian 100%. I don’t believe no airport going to build down there if the people, the organizers and the people and politicians who are willing to stand up with the people against it come out and show the government, the executive council, the British government and the rest of them, positively, we don’t want no airstrip down there, the government has no choice but to say, the people have rejected the option. It is a matter now of mobilization and education.
B. Roach: And they can count on your support even from the inside?
Caller: I’m supporting right now. Here I am talking for you on the telephone on the radio. I have no qualms about stating that position. I’ve told all the members of CRM that openly. If they have a march tomorrow, I’ll be right at the front of the march with them. If they organize anything, I’ll be right there.
B. Roach: Thank you very much so. Julian are you still willing to … ?
J. Romeo: I think I said the PLM Party has made a decision, not the PLM government.
B. Roach: I think you did mention something about the government at the front. Do you want to correct that statement?
J. Romeo: I just want to re-emphasize that whatever decisions government makes, especially concerning something as important as an airstrip, they must to some extent, consult with the people and get the blessings from the people.
B. Roach: Good evening, caller.
Caller: Good evening. I was listening to the last caller there and it looks like, what he’s telling me, God help Montserrat, ain’t it? The PLM or the Party or the government allow you guys to have this discussion. You didn’t have it privately. If the government want to stop you, they will stop you, according to what he’s saying. This guy, I don’t know if he’s really all there in the brain. But anyway, I don’t’ think that ….. The guy said, he’d give …. (unless I don’t understand language) that the government is actually allowing you – not what the people want—the government have a discussion, have meetings and tell the people. You are not speaking for the government, you know, and you have this and he reckons, at least the government allows you to use Radio Montserrat. Who it belongs to, the government or the people? What is Radio Montserrat. Anyway ….
B. Roach: That’s really another issue, so ….
Caller: Let me move on. I just tell you because I am listening, as a Montserratian, I can’t believe this guy is saying that. But the airport issue is open for discussion for many times. It did not take Mr. Brandt, the last government, they had discussion. Our government here gallivants all the way up and dig out a road up to Old Quaw, which in people’s minds, they believe they intended to raise the airport issue and try something. All in a sudden, Lewis comes along and said, we have accept that. Now you don’t consider the people and the socio-economics of the airport. You don’t consider the people, (not you), these fellows don’t consider the people that live in Geralds, have lived there about 200 years. You don’t even invite them to ? , you’re going move their houses, you’re going to move everything without even having a discussion. Even in Britain, there is no ? they build airports in Britain and they have to discuss with people. What? They are taking them from where there they are, nothing, you don’t ask people nothing. This …… ? ? ? is a cheek. Now you don’t even ask the people what they think about it (not your lot) they don’t ask the people what they’re talking about. They gallivant down to Old Quaw, dig around there (Lewis did it) and clap himself on the back. What was is for?
B. Roach: Good question and I’m going to ask the committee here to give us their feeling and their understanding of what took place there. Thank you very much for calling, caller. We won’t forget that the previous caller did suggest that himself and Lewis (although Lewis is the one who fronts on this matter) that they are indeed for an airstrip at Geralds. What is your impression, guys, on the road that was built into Old Quaw. I was flying in the other day here and I see vehicles over in Old Quaw, which means it’s a place that is quite accessible. What was that all about?
J. Romeo: Well, let me say here that I must give credit to Dr. Lewis for being the first person to have proposed Old Quaw even before discussions were held by even CRM concerning Old Quaw. In his papers that he produced some years ago, he was the first person who had outlined that this might be a suitable place to put an airport.
I must give the other caller who is a minister who called, I must give him credit, yes. He has verbally said to us and has said to me especially ….
B. Roach: I don’t want him to call back and say he’s not a minister, but a member of the legislative council.
J. Romeo: Well, a member of the legislative council, that he has said very much that he is not in favour of Geralds and he’d love to see other options opened and that’s great. And what does the road to Old Quaw mean? It has opened up the lands for people to see exactly the possibilities, to let us start to dream, because we have to be given an opportunity to see.
B. Roach: So gentlemen, you are taking the view that Old Quaw and his actions was really to open up the area, give you an opportunity and see what the place is like? But what are you prepared to do in the alternative to Geralds? Because remember you do not think that we are going to have an airstrip at Geralds. If they even move ahead on some guise that it is safe to do so, you don’t think it is feasible or it is worthwhile at all. Old Quaw, providing it will meet these conditions as well, will be suitable. But let’s hold that as we say, good evening to our next caller.
Caller: Good evening. I was wondering about this consultation business, how difficult it is for either the government of Montserrat or the special interest group to just do five, six thousand flyers with basically 3 questions: Would you want Geralds, would you want Thatch Valley, would you want Old Quaw as the proposed airstrip. You tick either yes or no and have a line at the bottom: give a reason for your answer. Give them a self-addressed envelope or whatever and you send it back. And you get the feedback from the people, because I know in other countries, when there’s a ticklish issue like that, that’s what they do. People send out flyers to get people’s opinion. And it has being banging around for months now and you hear decisions are being made and then somebody chops it down, decisions are being made and somebody chops it down. But to be really honest I don’t think the people have ever been consulted and I think that is an insult. So I would prefer if something on that level is done so at least whoever is in charge could actually see what the people are thinking.
B. Roach: Thank you very much, caller. Friends, you’ve heard that recommendation and the suggestion. Is it what you’re aiming to do now to sort of inform the people, educate them as to the pros and the cons? It would only be fair I think before you do that if you were to take that on board because I’m going to ask you to comment on it that you have somebody else or hear the other side. We remember again the caller talking something about the hierarchy and the problems that they face at the top there somewhere in coming to some decisions.
J. Bass: Given the proposal that the last speaker has made, we consider it to be an idea worth good consideration. Our purpose for bringing the matter to the attention of the public, really, firstly by writing about it, then by being interviewed on radio, and now throwing the matter open to questions on radio, is merely to air the matter so that people become familiar with the general issues involved. And they would be able to take some reasonable position. So that could be another step along the way to ascertaining what the people would want to see or at least get their feelings on the matter.
B. Roach: An airstrip at Geralds will take another two years once the studies show that it’s feasible, will take two years to construct. There was one study by the Italians, I think, who talked about quick tracking or fast tracking or making the suggestions as to how they can …. I think I”ll ask our engineer here if that is all possible that this can be done instead of in 24 months or 30 months or whatever, it can be done in 12 to 18 months? First of all, is that possible, will that be possible? It will take … How urgent is it for Montserrat that something be done? We seem to have lost 3 to 4 years already and no airstrip.
J. Bass: I’d like to re-emphasize this one thing and this is one of the things that hurt me especially, that our local government backed by DFID will come to a little thirty-nine point something square mile island that has been reduced to a third, 15 square miles, and in a little place called Geralds, not be accommodating and nice enough to at least call the community together and say, listen, this is our decision, what do you think? I am hurt by that. Put aside the rest of Montserrat and all the developments that we talk about, they have not even .. – DFID themselves have advertised on the web on the Internet for contracting work already in Geralds without even to talking to Geralds. And let me tell you this, the gentleman said before, if it was anywhere else in the world, this won’t have been happening. If somebody was deciding to move Piccadilly Circus and run a road through it in a different angle, trust me, they’ll be so much debate and discussion in London that it would probably never even happen.
B. Roach: We have a caller coming in. Good evening, caller.
Caller: I agree with him. We must of course have public relations. There is no question at all about that. There should be a wide-ranging discussion on it and I take it that this is part of it. Of course, CRM, you did initiate the discussions. But of course you are doing on behalf of, for the benefit of the whole country. So, that I must associate myself with it. Whether or not the government initiated it or not, it’s a discussion on behalf of all the people and I am part of it.
Now, I couldn’t resist because all of my friends up there on the panel and my other colleagues have …. and another colleague of mine has expressed his strong views. It would be unwise …. I feel we must come down to the nitty gritty. I feel we must come to the cost of what we are talking about and perhaps it is here that reason will prevail. I feel we are faced with a terrible, difficult situation and while I will have a preference, of course, for an airport in the best possible location, it comes down, to my mind, to some embarrassingly hard questions of what we can afford. I want to put it to you in local terms because I am frustrated. Yes, I know the economic benefits of having an airport in Thatch Valley and yet our sponsors say to us, we are not going to help you with and ???? , it’s going to cost too much. They argue and we say all sort of things. As I listen even to the program just before here, they were talking about reviving the private sector, the government must be the enabler. And one of the enabling acts would be to have a facility that can attract … to service our tourism industry which is where we have lived for all these years and where we have all our money in that area for all the years. So that if you are not going to address the basis factor of our economy, our tourism product, you are not at all addressing it. Don’t talk about no private sector and reviving private sector when you’re not enabling the private sector to live. That’s a waste. Ideally an airport in Thatch Valley seem to be the preferred site. I am little embarrassed about Old Quaw. I don’t know who was it that condemned it, (I don’t know who was it that condemned it; it seems to have been condemned may rightly or wrongly) but let’s say the ideal site is Thatch Valley.
B. Roach: Probably you weren’t listening, caller, a little earlier when I think everybody says the Thatch Valley is the preferred option. Even with that though, none of us still know as I think the committee here as agreed, nobody really knows if even that site would be acceptable and safe. But I want you to listen to the answer that you will get because, in deed, they have said, the Old Quaw (you say you were a little embarrassed about it and that somebody seemed to have condemned it) but if you listen to what the CRM said …
Caller: Who was it? Was this an ICAO man who did that? Who did it? Was it the Italians who did it? Who did that report?
B. Roach: …. condemned it. Except that I believe that …. I’m going to ask the CRM people to bring out another bit of information, I think, that caused this one paragraph here on the Old Quaw situation which seemed to have condemned it.
Caller: Let me just end to say that all of us (it’s not just the government) this entire country is faced with the embarrassment of: it’s one thing to have something in a preferred site, the people who are sponsoring us say openly and without any hiding it, we will not assist you to go there. And I ask you and the hard question is before us, what do we do? This is the hardest thing that I’ve ever had to face. What do I do?
B. Burke: Caller, I would say that the local government and the overseas government should take the best value for money.
Caller: My brother, our sponsors have said to us openly, (it’s no hidden thing), we will not assist you to go to your preferred option site.
B. Roach: Which is Thatch Valley. There is in an in-between …. which is what I want you to listen to.
Caller: Let me say it in local terms. It’s just like me going over to my friend, Gary Moore and I have a certain amount of money in my pocket. I would love to have a drink of Remy Martin and when he tells me the price of Remy, I can’t get there. You say, you can’t want Remy Martin when you have rum money in your pocket.
B. Burke: But caller, but we said is that provided …..
Caller: We are embarrassed as a people. And I am not taking any sides here. I am saying I am embarrassed because of this whole situation. We will not … With all the arguments that we put up, we will never get them to listen to us and by deuce, I don’t what to do.
B. Roach: Caller, in your position, I think, perhaps what the CRM is really ….
Caller: They are safely saying, this is what we are faced with, to say to the British government, we don’t want any airport in Geralds; if we can’t get one, we’ll have none at all. If it’s that what you are leading us to say, let me hear you say so openly.
B. Roach: I don’t think that is what they’re saying. So, I’ll …..
Caller: This is where ???? we’ll have it at the preferred site or we refuse Geralds. The last administration took that first time and in the end I think Mr. Brandt relented. He took a firm step and he refused Geralds. And in the end, when the harsh reality set in on him, I think he relented to say, well, let me take the temporary ? I’ve been listening to the discussion. I am embarrassed. I am frustrated and I’m sorry for us, really.
B. Roach: They are trying to relieve your frustration and seek your support so just listen to the answer to this frustration that you just brought up.
B. Burke: Caller, I was talking about the best value for money. Now, if we could get the wind studies done, say at both Geralds and Old Quaw and both prove favourable, wouldn’t it be wiser to spend 53 million and get 4,600 feet of runway than to get 1600 feet of runway? Obviously anybody would answer that question in favour of Old Quaw.
B. Roach: How do you go about having the wind studies done? I think your plan is to have this wind study done just the same, isn’t it? How are you going to go about doing that because clearly ….? Have you made any approach to the government and said, hey, listen, we are so dead against this thing. We don’t think it’s going to work, even you don’t think it’s going to work. Even your members who are our leader, some think that we shouldn’t be putting an airstrip there, why won’t you support us in doing the necessary studies at Old Quaw to see if ….
J. Romeo: Thatch Valley, Geralds, wherever.
B. Roach: … or wherever. CRM could you tell us where we stand on that.
J. Bass: Since 1999, September, when CRM had extensive discussions with Minister Weekes in the Ministry of Communications and Works, we suggested that the wind studies should be undertaken in that general area of Thatch Valley as well as at Geralds. But mainly to ascertain the wind situation the wind situation in the Thatch Valley area. And, in fact, we were given, we were shown the quotation from CMI, (the Caribbean Meteorological Institute) that they proposed in order to carry out those studies and it did not come to more than 35 thousand dollars, EC money. We asked the Ministry, repeatedly, to provide those sums in order to carry out those wind tests. In fact, they said, that they would have done it. At a meeting with the then PS and the Minister, we were given a commitment that those funds would be provided and it never came through. Even when Dr. Lewis … when we discussed with Dr. Lewis, the wind studies at Old Quaw, he said that they had a problem with funds. And the latest that we had from Dr. Lewis, in fact, was that after the ashfall that took place about a month ago, he said that the funds that would have been available to carry out that type of study were not available. So we have decided, look we are just going to organize the funds ourselves and just do it.
B. Roach: So there will be a wind study at Old Quaw? Thank you very much. Good evening, caller.
Caller: Has Geralds been decided as the airport as yet? Have any decision been made on Geralds?
B. Roach: I will read you what Dr. Lewis said, sir: “We are proceeding with the understanding that if the investigations which are necessary prove the area to be safe that we will proceed.” That is, that they will proceed to build the airstrip at Geralds. They have agreed for them to go ahead and do the design and do the studies, do the flight tests and all of that to see if Geralds would be acceptable. He goes on to say, “and the feeling is that, in fact, the results of the studies will in fact allow us to go ahead with a strip at Geralds Park which could be completed within the next two years.” It sounds like he’s saying that although we have to wait for these studies, it looks like whatever caused him to say that, that it will be OK and so we will proceed.
Caller: Well, I have spoken to the Chief Minister and got a different sounding from the Chief Minister. The Chief Minister says, no study has been made yet, therefore he cannot come out and tell the people anything as yet because nothing has been done; it has not been sanctioned. And I know that this government is against Geralds. If their hands are forced, they may have to come to the people. And we are speaking about Dr. Lewis, but he is the one that opened the road to Old Quaw. That is his thinking.
B. Roach: Caller, you are quite correct but DFID is going ahead with the studies. They are going ahead with the design and they are going ahead with that if these things prove to be safe, that they will go ahead. They have gotten the OK from the government of Montserrat to proceed.
Caller: Well, I doubt it.
B. Roach: Well, I can say to you that if …. You can doubt that, but DFID themselves have acknowledged and have said, yes, this is what the position is.
Caller: DFID might have it mind but the chief minister said that he has no ideas yet about this, that he has no information about the suitability of Geralds up to now.
B. Roach: As the host of this program here, hosting for CRM, I will put a call out (I’m sure the CRM people will support this) to the Chief Minister to tell the people of Montserrat, the true position.
Caller: Right. That should be done. Thank you.
J. Romeo: Caller, I know that you are a caucus member because the sound of your voice tells me this and I am confused because if you are not certain as to what your party position is concerning the airport, trust me, you are very confused. You need to call Dr. Lewis and get an update because it is evident that you are not up to date with what’s happening.
H. Bramble: One of the things that must be borne in mind is that when this European Union funding surfaced again, re-surfaced again, that when they drew up the terms of reference, the terms of reference was that they would look at all the options, which would have included, at that time, Thatch Valley, Old Quaw, Geralds. But what we have found through looking through the Italian’s report, is that almost the entire study was done on Geralds and the others just given a passing glance.
B. Roach: Well, let me stop … cut you there, but I’m not sure that I would entirely agree with you because it is quite an indepth study which really ended up saying that all these studies have to take place before they can proceed with any of them. They tried to weigh the social impact and the different things and so on and so on. And it’s quite an indepth study. The unfortunate thing is, in my view, was that some of the studies that were used were already faulty. We have a caller. Good evening, caller.
Caller: Good evening. I would like to know if it is not surety that the airport down by Geralds would be going forward, why waste money still there?
J. Bass: Good question.
B. Roach: Thank you very much, caller. Question? Answer?
J. Bass: That’s a good question because we are wondering the same thing ourselves.
B. Roach: Why should any money be spent there because one of the things I understand is that, what is required to be done even before the airport begins is going to cost a considerable amount of money, as well. So one of the reasons, perhaps why they don’t want to do a similar study elsewhere. What …. ?
V. White: They probably want to access the funds.
B. Roach: Who wants to access?
V. White: Either the government of Montserrat or the British government wants to access the funds, because they’ll lose it if they don’t.
B. Roach: Oh, you’re saying that there is that thing that we didn’t talk about where the EU has said if you don’t use these funds, you will lose them and you won’t have an easy chance getting them again.
J. Bass: Well, that’s another topic you know because we will want to talk to that at some point.
B. Roach: Good evening, caller.
J. Bass: Good evening. I’m calling again to answer the question about wasting money. From the day DFID dropped in here to deal with financing and now managing and running Montserrat, they’ve been wasting money. So we shouldn’t even look at this as a one-off wasting money issue. Money waste up on government headquarters. Money waste down in Davy Hill. Money waste out in Lookout. Money waste up on a water thing they built up on Dick Hill that can’t even hold water. Money waste on all RAV4 and them that they have driving up and down. Let we talk about wasting money. DFID, (I mean I am not trying to make excuse for the inadequacies or inequities of the present government) but again we need to ….
B. Roach: Or any other government.
Caller: Okay, let’s say all of them. We need to look at the hierarchy that runs and governs this island and we need to start recognizing the FCO, the governor, DFID, all hold a higher position in the decision-making process in this country than the elected government. And when the elected government makes a decision, a lot of times—just as you all said, Mr. Brandt refused Geralds, outright. He took a position and the whole country should have supported him on it. At the end of the day, he got so much blow from DFID, so much blow from the FCO, so much blow from the governor, so much blow from her majesty’s government in the name of Madame Claire Short, that to even save himself at the end and whatever little government he had, he had to capitulate. He was coerced into a position of accepting and all the while that this is going on, money wasting. But none of the money wasting on us. We need to start looking at a lot of other things that are going in this country and we can we just take that same airport there as an example. How much studies they’ve done on it now? About six consultancies, at least 3 or 4 million dollars done waste already in consultancies, just consultancies alone, and they’re not done yet. The people that’s designing Geralds, they’ve re-aligned it at least twice already now. That’s three different design structures already gone into place. They have surveyors out there now right now surveying the whole area and when you ask them what they are doing, they are telling you about they are surveying the area to widen road. And when you look where they line up their equipment, none of it lines up on no road. OK? There is money wasting all the time. Now we need to look at who is wasting the money, who is pocketing the money going in and where the money is going because the whole objective of DFID coming here is not to help us, it’s to help themselves and to siphon off as much of the money as they can in such a way that it flows back into their pocket and to make sure that as little of that money flows into the economy of this as possible.
B. Roach: A whole other discussion, caller and we need to get together on this. Thank you very, very much.
V. White: I was just stating the fact that you have about 4 studies that have been done of competent consultants, supposedly, and you are going to tell me that not one of those consultancies recommended wind studies which is the first thing that you do when you are looking at any airport?
B. Roach: Well the first person to really do it, is this gentleman, Mr. Vreedenburgh. And perhaps we should just remind our listeners, the recommendations of this gentleman, which. It is quite interesting. And when we talk about the matter being ….. I am sorry. This is this month. I beg your pardon. This was in June and this is dated July 2001, just this year. And he says, “upgrade the existing heliport to comply fully with ICAO standards and recommended practices and expansion to the facility to increase its helicopter parking capacity.” Here is a gentleman who is saying, hey, airport is not in view yet, go improve on what you have on the helicopter so that it can be a more and a better service to Montserrat. “Confirm the government’s strategy for new aerodrome development in Montserrat with reference to the Physical Development Plan and various study reports for the initial development of an aerodrome with limited capacity at Geralds Bottom and the future development of a replacement aerodrome with greater capacity at another location.” And, one can read into this whatever we want to. It seems that government, along with agreeing that they will continue with the studies to develop Geralds, should have been looking at the other options as well. Good evening, caller.
Caller: What is the meaning of temporary?
B. Roach: Temporary: I’ll leave that to one of our scholars here.
B. Burke: Check government headquarters and you’ll find out.
J. Bass: It certainly means not long-term; it means in the short-term.
B. Roach: To be used in the mean time ….
J. Bass: until other alternatives or more permanent alternatives are put in place.
B. Roach Does that answer your question, caller?
Caller: Yes.
B. Roach: Thank you very much. 3. “Undertake an aeronautical wind and climatological study to confirm the suitability of the Geralds Bottom location for an aerodrome to accommodate safe operations by the aircraft it is intended to serve.” Note, no question of any other location. “Undertake an aeronautical flight operations ….” Etc., etc. which is what the government is agreeing to. “Undertake an aircraft noise exposure assessment,” which is what the government is agreeing to. The government is really agreeing to doing all these things, but in association and relative only to Geralds.
B. Roach: Good evening, caller.
Caller: Bennette, I have to … whether this is a truth or whether it is a position, I wish to say that I am certain that my government is leaning towards the approval of the airport at Geralds. Now there is a crying need ….
B. Roach: To join you in discussion here, they have agreed to an airport at Geralds, providing by the ?? study, providing that the studies prove to be safe.
Caller: Naturally, that’s always a certainty for any site: Geralds, Old Quaw or Thatch Valley, always.
B. Roach: Except that they are not doing any studies at the other sites.
Caller: Those are details that will be looked into.
B. Roach: Are you giving us a promise here that this will be looked into? CRM says they are going to go ahead and do some studies at Old Quaw.
Caller: I don’t know if airports are built without safe studies being done. That’s all I can say. Let’s look at the (apart from those technical things) let’s look at a few other things. There is a crying need for a fixed wing facility to service the island more adequately. Now the question is what will be get? A 9-seater, a 20-seater, a 50 seater? And as the lady asked just a while ago, what is the meaning of temporary? Temporary is in relation to permanent. Until when you can establish something permanent, what you have, what we are offered now is something is temporary. And, we need to …. Really we have to put everything in place here as we go forward and soon it will seem as if …. It may boil down to …. As we mobilize and Montserratians express their views, we have to rationalize and to reason to say, can we accept a temporary facility? Will it suit or is it ideal to our purpose or can we accept it and wait until when we can get something permanent?: Do we have the funds to do what we wish to do?
B. Roach: Thank you very, caller. On that, I will just simply say in answer to what you just said, that the committee here earlier tonight gave reasons why (a) that that temporary will never be temporary and I think somebody would like to know, well when they want to know what temporary really means, perhaps they really want to know whether it means 2 years, 5 years, 10 years or 20 years? CRM is saying that there is no way anybody ….not unless the British government would spend 40 million dollars and jump up and do something else someplace else. You asked about the viability of the temporary strip at Geralds. They are saying it would not suit, serve the purpose at all for Montserrat’s progress and it’s development.
J. Romeo: I want to cut in here. You read something about the heliport. One of the things ….
B. Roach: We have one more call coming in. We only have about 5 minutes left on the program and we have one more call coming in. And we probably will look into final statements beginning with you caller.
Caller: Government headquarters: Is it presently a temporarily government headquarters built?
B. Roach: It was called a temporary and it’s supposed to be temporary, yes.
Caller: So is there any provision now made for us to get a permanent government headquarters ???? from temporary to permanent?
B. Roach: Can anyone here on the panel answer that?
H. Bramble: Not that we are aware of. But let me say something here. In this our entire re-developmental stage, we have seen a new meaning to the word temporary. And for the past 3 or 4 years, temporary and permanent in Montserrat now means the same thing. So when we are speaking about development and we are speaking about temporary now, we put it in the same mode as being permanent.
Caller: Because I look at the same ….. Would we end up in the situation?
B. Roach: Caller, it seems as if what we will have to do and I hope CRM will really probably get this answer because it is a good question. It’s going to take 2 years to construct this airport. It would take probably 3 or 4 to construct a real and bigger airport. So, certainly if we are going to have to wait 2 years for this one, it will take at least another 2 or 3 years to build another one, so we have to assume that temporary, for the time being …. And, the caller before you did state that it would mean waiting until we can find the money to do that. So temporary could be anything from 3 to forever, in the terms of what we are facing in Montserrat. Thank you very much.
J. Romeo: I just wanted to re-emphasize that …. And I wanted to say, thank you to the governor for allowing us to come to see him, the CRM group. We went and say him and with our interview with him, he spoke about the heliport being liable. It’s a temporary facility and the British government seem to be very worried as to, in the event of something handling, that some American will suit them and take their pants and shirts and underwear off them. Now, the reason why a lot of other helicopters don’t come to Montserrat is simply because it is not certified by the DCA or the ICAO. They cannot come here, because in the event of anything happening, they will not receive insurance and coverage over it. We have to understand that. Now, the point is, had it not been for CRM, and thanks to Dr. Lewis and some of the push that he has given along with us, no wind study would have been done for Geralds. And after 2 or 5 years, we might have found ourselves in the same situation where Geralds would not have been certified by the ICAO and would have turned up to be a white elephant for Montserrat because if we find out the airstrip is not adequate in length, if we find out that there is too much turbulence after building the strip and spending monies and not considering any options at all, it means that we’d be stuck with a white elephant. The question is who would take us out of that situation in another 5 years again.
J. Bass: We seem to be coming to the end of this discussion and we really want to thank the callers who have called in. But, we are in an extraordinary circumstance, in an extraordinary situation because what I see down the road is that Montserratians are going to have to take this matter into their own hands. And, we as a people must not stand by and allow a runway that cannot form the basis on which we build our economy to be foisted on us. Look, certain things are not negotiable. If somebody were to come and tell you to take the roof off your house, so rain would wet you every time rain comes, the answer is just no, just no. And I think that as a people, hopefully that we are properly lead, will generate the onus, the initiative, the imagination and the guts, to do what Tony Meade said to us 2 years ago on the invitation of Hylroy here, to talk to the airport issue. He said, you can start off with a grass strip, put a few hundred yards of concrete on the threshold and until you can do better, you can use that. But as a people, we are going to have to get together, organize ourselves and start with a grass strip, if necessary, but going to Geralds – both Tony and Carl Burke said, to come into Geralds on a 500 meter runway, they said that any aircraft coming in there, must come in at near stalling speed. These guys fly every day. They are responsible for the lives of several hundred people each day, and if they tell me that, I’m going to accept what they say. So I think as Montserratians, we have to get together and do what we have to do. The answer is no to Geralds and we must look someplace else.
B. Roach: And more importantly, you’ve said that it will not enhance the development of Montserrat.
J. Bass: Certainly not.
B. Roach: Vernon.
V. White: Well, the program previous to this one, talked about development and I defy anybody, or the consultants to tell me how in the world that they are going to develop Montserrat and all the initiatives that they have without an airport, it just can’t work.
B. Roach: Thank you very much. Mr. Burke.
B. Burke: What I would say is that anytime we get an airport or an airstrip that cannot take a Dash-8, we are moving backwards into the 60s and beyond.
B. Roach: And one of our callers made that point. Mr. Isles.
R. Isles: I would say to the people of Montserrat, we have to find other ways of getting out of Montserrat besides going to Antigua. Every flight that we would have with a 9-seater plane, we would have to go to Antigua. Why can’t we go to St. Kitts, St. Martin, Puerto Rico from Montserrat. With Geralds, we can only go to Antigua, no matter if we have a helicopter or whatever plane can land there. We need to move out of Antigua so our baggage cannot be stolen. We don’t have all this harassment in Antigua. Let us go to St. Martin, St. Kitts, Puerto Rico. Why do we have to go to Antigua every time.
B. Roach: Hylroy.
H. Bramble: I just want to re-iterate here that as Montserratians, we must, we must say no to Geralds. We of the CRM, we have been trying to point out to you, the pros and the cons of having a proper airport facility. And when we look at the safety factors surrounding an airport in Geralds, it is a definite no. We cannot afford the social upheaval that an airport in Geralds will cause, the dislocation, the exposure to noise, the stress factors. And not only to Geralds, but to Lookout as well. And, the thing is, when you dislocate people from Geralds, who will build the houses for them? Where will the finds the lands to relocate them to? As it is, we are already in a dilemna with housing already. Do we want to add to that dilemma? The answer to Geralds must be a resounding no. And as part of the CRM grouping, I can safely say that we would be back once we are given the air time to speak and to educate the people on all the pros and cons of all the options because CRM have not just looked at one option, we have been looking at all the options, contrary to what others have been doing so far. So it is a NO, for Geralds.
J. Romeo: I have a closing remark. I want to re-emphasize. My point has always been democracy. And, I remember in 1995 Mr. Brandt was going away on a democratic convention and one of the things that I re-emphasized to my sister who had some communication with him was the fact that democracy starts at home. Added to that, Austin Bramble, back in, somewhere in 93 or so, I remember him in one discussion, development is about people. And I want to re-emphasize that. That my difficulty has always been is the fact that our government seems autocratic and that DFID who supports us financially at the same time, had they been in America and had to face affirmative action from many other people, they would not have come short of being called racist. Thank you.
B. Roach: Thank you very much and I wish to thank you gentlemen for having me here with you on this program, and thank our listeners and thank those who participated and joined us by calling in, and wish you all a very good night until you hear again from us on the issue of the airport. Do watch People’s Television on Monday nights where you can see similar discussion by this similar group on the airport and other issues, brought to you by the Montserrat Reporter. Good night.
J. B