Pickersgill

The Editor, Sir:

The combined grouping of associations who claimed that they represented the interest of the residents of the Portmore municipality has indeed had their day in court. The Privy Council delivered their ruling on December 3.

The Privy Council ruling is definitive; it states that the construction of the Portmore Highway and the decision to charge a toll to meet the cost of financing this construction has not affected the right to property of any individual in the communities of the Portmore Municipality.

The Privy Council is clear, the only basis for any violation of the Constitution would only be so if the Government had undertaken the compulsory acquisition of parcels of land owned by residents and done so not guided by the laws of the country. There was no compulsory acquisition of property to build the Portmore Highway.

The ruling

I want it to be clear that the ruling says what I have always upheld; a government formed by the People's National Party would never seek to violate any element of the Constitution. The Government of the People's National Party would not seek to take away the rights of any grouping of citizens of this country.

The People's National Party government in response to the development needs of Jamaica took a deliberate decision at the close of the 1990s to pursue the construction of Highway 2000, of which the six lane Portmore Causeway is a component. The Government of the People's National Party was clear that it was necessary, to set the stage for further economic development, that our major infrastructure had to be either upgraded and where necessary new facilities put in place. This is the vision which guided both the Highway 2000 and North Coast Highway projects.

Concerns

During the construction of the Portmore Causeway and after several community meetings, we went further and held briefing sessions with various representatives to discuss the initiative. We responded to the clear and legitimate concerns raised by several residents. We moved to address the concerns raised, including the bottleneck created at the Marcus Garvey intersection and the need for improved road surface on the Mandela Highway.

We sought to give a listening ear and to guide the residents, advising that this was not a Constitutional matter. I certainly had an open door policy when I served as minister. It was unfortunate that a matter of development was politicised by the then Opposition Party.

Both the Constitutional Court and the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeals. Those who had brought this matter against the state were in fact advised that their case was devoid of merit to go further. The ruling by both courts then was that the Mandela Highway did in fact provide an appropriat route. The judgement delivered by the Privy Council on December 3, upholds both these decision.

I am, etc.,

ROBERT PICKERSGILL

PNP spokesman on transport