Harris Condemns Drew and Brantley, Labeling SSZ a Betrayal of Bradshaw’s Legacy

Former Prime Minister and leader of the People’s Labour Party (PLP), Dr. Timothy Harris, launched a scathing attack on Prime Minister Dr. Terrance Drew and Nevis Premier Mark Brantley during a Heroes Day brunch. He accused both leaders of deceiving the public by facilitating the transfer of Nevisian land to foreign entities under the guise of “sustainable development”. Dr. Harris vehemently denounced what he termed a calculated scheme, employing strong language to express his outrage at what he perceived as a betrayal of the Nevisian people and their patrimony. The crux of his argument revolved around legislation passed during Dr. Drew’s administration, which Dr. Harris claimed opened the door for exploitation by foreign investors.

Dr. Harris meticulously detailed the legislative process, naming individuals involved in the bill’s passage and accusing Premier Brantley of attempting to deflect responsibility by portraying the issue as solely a federal matter. He directly implicated Premier Brantley in the process, highlighting his role in seconding the motion and accusing him of playing a political game to avoid accountability. Dr. Harris painted a grim picture of Nevis becoming a playground for the wealthy, with ordinary citizens losing access to ancestral lands, replaced by exclusive enclaves for the ultra-rich. He warned against the dangers of the Special Sustainability Zone (SSZ) framework, arguing that it masked a land grab that would dispossess Nevisians of their heritage.

The former Prime Minister invoked the legacy of Sir Robert Bradshaw and his fight to secure land for the people, framing the current situation as a reversal of those hard-won gains. He underscored the potential for the SSZ framework to transform community lands into private estates, complete with helipads and other amenities catering exclusively to the privileged few. Dr. Harris contrasted this with his own administration’s efforts to reclaim land for housing and community development, portraying his actions as protective measures designed to benefit the Nevisian people. He characterized the current government’s actions as a “bad bill” that jeopardizes the future of Nevisians and their connection to the land.

Dr. Harris’s accusations sparked immediate and widespread concern. Civil society groups, farmers, and property owners on Nevis expressed alarm at the potential implications of the legislation. Opposition voices amplified the critique, demanding greater transparency from the government regarding the lands involved, the safeguards in place, and the nature of any discussions with potential investors. The unfolding controversy threatened to overshadow the Heroes Day commemorations, forcing a national conversation about sovereignty, development, and the ultimate beneficiaries of the islands’ most valuable resource: land.

In response to the mounting criticism, both the federal and Nevis Island administrations issued statements defending the process. They maintained that land rights and local control were being preserved, and that the SSZ framework would promote sustainable development while benefiting the local population. However, Dr. Harris dismissed these assurances as hollow rhetoric, pointing to the specific language of the bill and the record of its passage as evidence of a deliberate attempt to mislead the public. He called on the government to provide clear and unambiguous answers to address the growing unease and skepticism surrounding the SSZ initiative.

Dr. Harris concluded his address by positioning himself as a defender of the people’s interests, vowing to fight against what he perceived as a sell-off of Nevisian land. He demanded that the Prime Minister and Premier Brantley halt the process or face full public accountability. The controversy ignited by his speech had far-reaching implications, potentially leading to legal challenges, increased parliamentary scrutiny, and significant political fallout. The former Prime Minister’s forceful intervention ensured that the debate over land ownership, development, and the rights of Nevisians would continue to dominate the national conversation. He made it clear that the fight for the future of Nevisian land was far from over.