Scotland ignores conservation law in climate speech

| 02/12/2010

(CNS): The issue of the country’s National Conservation Law (NCL) was conspicuous by its absence in the environment minister’s opening remarks at the third National Climate Change Workshop this morning. In stark conference to last year’s opening address when the minister emphasized the pressing need for the law to protect the environment, on Thursday Mark Scotland made no mention of the derailed legislation. This time he spoke about working towards a National Climate Change Policy for Cayman, rising sea temperatures and ocean acidification threats.

Speaking at the Marriot resort in Grand Cayman where the conference is being held he said it was critical to identify and implement appropriate adaptation measures across all sectors of the economy.

“A glance at the Green Paper on the climate change issues facing the Cayman Islands confirms this need for a comprehensive and collaborative approach,” Scotland told the delegates.He added that the document offered an idea of how to lessen the local impact of this global issue.

“I believe many people shy away from discussing climate change because as an issue it is just too big to grasp. This Green Paper however highlights possible solutions that are within our reach. It also identifies how we can adjust other policies and legislation to accommodate climate change adaptation and mitigation. Finally, it shows how our combined, pro-active actions can cost-effectively achieve national adaptation and mitigation goals,” Scotland said as he shied away from mentioning what part the NCL will play in achieving those goals and what had happened to the law.
He noted that during last year’s conference beach erosion, reef and fish decline, and rising energy, food and water costs were at the forefront of concerns.

“None of us living here can claim that we will be able to escape any of these impacts, and so I hope that the final climate change strategies will include practical targets for the entire population,” the minister said.

Last year Scotland himself had stated that the country had to have comprehensive and updated environmental protection legislation. “We in Cayman need to understand that the time has come to make sacrifices to protect our Islands for future generations,” was the position the minister had taken 12 months ago but today there is still no national conservation law.

The conservation law has been in discussion for almost a decade the most recent draft of the law which many conservation experts say has been severely curtailed in the protection it offers to the environment is still being criticized after considerable public consultation during the summer of 2010. It is unclear how much further the next draft will undermine the potential protection required to preserve the countries dwindling natural resources, or if a second draft has been prepared.

Although the minister had also acknowledged last year that the proposed NCL undertakes to implement the provisions of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Kyoto Protocol, Scotland completely ignored the point in this year’s presentation.

The local workshop comes in the wake of news from the UN climate conference in Cancun, Mexico, Tuesday that rising sea levels caused by climate change are set to cause damage of billions of dollars to the islands states of the Caribbean by the middle of the century, including wiping out more than 300 premium tourist resorts.

CNS Note: For those readers who saw the earlier post this was based on the minister’s speech from 2009 which was circulated in error as this year’s presentation. The above report is based on the actual remarks made by the minister on 2 December 2010. CNS has also attached both presentations to enable readers to compare the two presentations made one year apart.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: Science and Nature

About the Author ()

Comments (24)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Caymanian for facts says:

    This conference is just another way for bureaucrats and technocrats to try to justify their existence. Just what is this speck of an island with practically no industry or manufacturing supposed to do to stop global warming-sorry-“climate change” (earth is not actually getting any warmer).

    The simple fact is that the earth’s climate historicallygoes through changes. Even if you drank the kool-aid and believe in man made climate change, the only thing we can do here is raise the elevations of future developments.
    Anyone who says otherwise is blowing hot air and adding to the carbon-dioxide in the air and causing “global warming”.

  2. Anonymous says:

    With Ezzard against the conversation law because he wants the land owners to be ble to cash in for developments and parking lots and then they can complain that the country is developed too much by foreigners it is the same reason the PPM or the UDP have ignored this law.
    It comes down to votes not what is best for the future of the country. Pandering to the few to hurt the many.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Totally agree with 15;;06 as I have been saying this for many years.I am sure even he/she is not against development but it has to be done with the environment in mind.No vibrant environment = NO VISITORS PERIOD!!!!

  4. EyesWideOpen says:

    Ignored the Constitution Law, now ignores the Conservation Law……..can you really expect any better from this man???

  5. McCarron M McLaughlin says:

    Why is the government not stepping up efforts to pass this critical legislation? Because it’s not in their or their friends best interest…

    Shame on the opposition for not doing nearly enough to bring this issue to the forefront of the debate in our society.

    It shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone in the Cayman Islands that Mr. Scotland and the government have again side-stepping the conservation law, this law if enacted now will cause major stumbling blocks to future proposed projects – e.g. shetty hospital, cruise dock, Moonbay port, just to name a few.

    See below CNS article from July this year, where the minister delayed the law for six (6) weeks, that was almost five (5) months now..

    Having the new conservation pass would mean more “teeth” and “tougher laws” on the environment, this would surely take a BIG bite out of many people’s plans.

    I am predicting that if the conservation law is every passed by this government, it will be passed after the government does their damage.

    • Anonymous says:

      Can we have a fair and accurate discussion? Two successive governments have refused to bring the National Conservation Law to the LA. Maybe three or four….Two Governments who obviously did not agree with it. Many Caymanian land owners don’t agree with it. Can it be modified? Or are the technocrats holding out for absolute power to protect the environment at the expense of everything else?

      Conservation is but one part… an important part, but just one part. We need to find ways to manage development and designate areas as protected. The conservationists cannot have the final and only say on how I choose to develop my land.

      A born Caymanian.


      • Green Mango says:

        Ask them, in public, why they object(ed) to it. Go on, I’ll wait. And when you get a public answer feel free to report it. I hope you’ll get an actual answer. (As opposed to ‘well, we have to consider’.) I didn’t.

        Here’s an interesting survey to do. Ask random people (a) are you a Caymanian land owner and, if so (b) do you object to the NCL and, if so (c) why? Again, the numbers (and answers) just don’t add up.

        But then again innuendo is sooo much more fun. In fact, if you read the law you will see that it provides ways to manage development and designate areas as protected, as you ask for. You will also not be able to point to any part of the Law which says that "the conservationists have the final and only say in how I develop my land".

        A Born Caymanian Land Owner in support of the (principles) of the NCL. (Why just the principles? Because the reality of the law isn’t going to go far enough to accomplish what it should.)

  6. whodatis says:

    "This time he spoke about working towards a National Climate Change Policy for Cayman …"

    Really folks?

    Is this where we’re at in Cayman today?

    "Climate change"?!

    Wow … never underestimate the power of the western, centralized media.

    They can make fools out of millions in a very short period of time.

    My head hurts – going to bed.

    (Hope I don’t awake to a Grouper as my next door neighbor in the morning … you know – with all the "climate change" that is taking place these days.)

    • O'Really says:

      I won’t bother to argue global warming with you, but I am interested in how you reconcile your deep loathing for the western capitalist system and all it’s evils ( the subject of many a long rant by your goodself on CNS ) with thefact that the anti-global warming lobby is of course funded by some of the largest and most relentlessly capitalist companies of them all, big oil. Here’s just one link:

      Big oil can’t catch that grouper, but they had no trouble with you it would appear.

      • whodatis says:

        Hi O’Really,


        I strive to extract logic from wherever it exists – regardless of its resting place.

        Politics and ‘grouping’ matter not attimes like these.

        On this particular issue the actual science simply does not support the theory.

        By the way, please do not refer to my posts as "rants" … it hurts my feelings.

    • Anonymous says:

      Those multinational oil companies have sure done a number on you – actually making you think you are being clever for not understanding climate change! perhaps you could pick up a scientific paper sometime and do some of your own reasearch before going along with the oil companies company line!

      Follow the money to find the truth!

      • whodatis says:

        On the contrary, I would advise YOU to "follow the money" on the part of the climate change agenda promoters.

        Regardless, "Climate Change" is the new religion – you either believe in the myth or you don’t.

        I don’t. The actual science simply does not support the theory.

        Not to mention the theory completely ignores the role of that big bright orange thing up there in the sky – the SUN.

        Personally, I have never been a believer in the hogwash that is "climate change" – this planet is a mega powerful and constantly changing force, it has endured far greater trials than anthropogenic "carbon emissions".

        *I simply do not understand how the believers can consciously ignore the facts surrounding "Climategate" and the "Danish texts".*

        However, to see how the majority of the western world has reacted to these scandals without so much as a flinch really proves that not much has changed;

        An attitude of superiority towards "lesser nations" coupled with a blind faith in the preying entities that promote themselves as friendly global protectors can result in a very dangerous and bewildering set of circumstances.

        All the while the true agenda (usually the pursuit of greater power and or money) sneaks in via the backdoor.

        Same story – different day.

      • Anonymous says:

        I don’t believe Professor Richard Lindzen receives a penny from "big oil", and as the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at M.I.T., his skeptical views on climate change have to be taken seriously, and I’m quite sure he has done more homework than all of us put together. (Check out his bio. on Wiki) Listen to his 53-minute lecture on YouTube, and you might understand why there are those of us who have moved closer to the idea that climate change has little to do with science and more to do with the UN’s political agenda. The I.P.C.C’s aims were roundly rejected  in  Copenhagen because the science, which really is in its infancy, cannot justify the catastrophic conclusions created by computer models using suspect algorithms. When your funding  as a researcher depends on finding for the case on climate change, then your conclusions will be biased. Follow the money indeed!

  7. Mozzie Fodder says:

    Mark Scotland is totally out of his depth – this man wouldn’t know Climate Change or Conservation if it fell out of his mustache……..

  8. Anonymous says:

    Such a shame that our people just DO NOT GET IT! Without the environment we have nothing – no tourism, no good quality of life etc.

    Will we ever get it together?

  9. Anonymous says:

    So what? The meeting was about climate change, not conservation laws.

    • .... says:

      Climate change and conservation go hand-n-hand. Too bad some of us are too idiotic to realize this.

      • Anonymous says:

        Gee, how is Cayman’s conservation law, which has nothing to do with energy or greenhouse efect or ozone or carbon dioxide or melting glaciers, going to have an effect on global warming. Try to focus on the subject of the meeting and then you will understand why it has nothing to do the conservation law.

    • Anonymous says:

      Even our mother country England has given up some of her green belt ( Conservation areas )for developments.

      • Anonymous says:

        She still has alot of greenbelt left but this 2 x 4 island (cement rock) does not.  That’s the point

      • Anonymous says:

        Our mother country is not a 2×4 island.  She gave up some of her green belt but not MOST of it.  We gave up most of our green belt – very little left – like no more protective mangroves so we will be swept out to sea if we have another strong hurricane.  We are a cement island; very overdeveloped.  This needs to slow down.  We only need to develop fast enough to keep Caymanians busy for generations to come – we don’t need an overcrowding of foreign labour and expats whining when they can’t step all over us.

        We need some fresh air.  Protect our little bit of green that Dart & Ryan et al haven’t yet destroyed.

  10. Anonymous says:

    The problem is that The Premier said on the floor on the LA recently that "I hope unna know dat law nah gah feed unna children" referring to the National Conservation Law……..and so the consultations and propaganda continues.