Letters & Opinion

A Robert Devaux adoption is very much required at National Trust

THE EDITOR: I have been a member of the National Trust for over 20 years and I must admit that, for the better part of the last 10 years, there is indeed a lack of enthusiasm in ensuring that the assets of the Trust are utilized diligently.

The Trust does not understand the importance of addressing the low-hanging fruit in order that the public can truly appreciate their goals and efforts.

In recent times, the Executive Director has become lackadaisical and tends to concentrate on superficial programs like placing fence poles at Sandy Beach in the south, when the discussions between the current administrations and DSH were at its peak.

There have never been real meetings to address the assets of the Trust (e.g the Rat Island site which has a number of historic buildings is completely overgrown and forgotten, the two docks created under the Derek Walcott plan are now dysfunctional, the INNISKILLIN monuments at the Morne) are neglected and overrun with weeds, the concrete tombs of our war heroes and Noble Laureates are seldom addressed.

These sites alone could bring in much-needed revenue to assist the Trust.

In my view, the Trust needs to identify individuals in the various communities who can visit the historic sites in their communities and make recommendations for some sort of maintenance, thereby attracting visitors.

An attempt was made to address the MARRIED WOMENS QUARTERS at Vigie, but that effort has fallen flat.

Politics has apparently infiltrated the Trust and a handful of members are now using the Trust as a vehicle for their own interests, which is sad.

The dedicated Trust members need to revisit what is presently ongoing, as the Trust is now on a sliding slope.

UNLIKE THE DAYS WHEN ROBERT DEVAUX, WHOSE HEART WAS IN THE RIGHT PLACE AND DEDICATED HIS TIME AND EFFORT TO GIVE THE TRUST A REAL DIRECTION. THIS NO LONGER EXITS.

Today we SEEM TO have a team of individuals who view the Trust as an organization in providing a salary and becoming civil servants in nature.

The latest attempt by a small group to flex their muscle in respect to the prison demolition matter was never brought to the members, but the political mindset within the organization took a stand without taking into account the real costs of maintaining these structures if in fact it they were awarded to the Trust.

The majority of members neither sanctioned, nor were aware, that the Trust had engaged the services of a firm of attorneys to seek an injunction.

To date, members have not been informed what the legal costs were for the services rendered, consequently, the managing director needs to be more transparent as the cost of the legal fees alone could have been utilized to address certain projects crying out for assistance. (Disgruntled Member)

4 Comments

  1. Much of what you stated is on point. The concerns and critique you shared would have carried more credibility had you identified yourself.

  2. You sound like a Unitedpac member to me and a UWP mouthorgan.
    Come on all members and potential members who love this country welcomed the news. It is something Mr Tulsie should be awarded for. He forced the government to seek dialogue with the people to plan a way forward for this invaluable historical asset.

    So what’s wrong with that? Stop supporting bad governance. Get up and look at things in an objective manner .

    Stop this nonsense of criticising when you should be praising. Grow some balls.

  3. I see that you are not ” disgruntled” enough to actually identify yourself. Your opinions hold no weight if you cannot own them

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *