As a ding dong battle begins between Government Opposition, the GSD is aware that the proposed location for GBC was approved two years ago, it is irrelevant as the structure should not have been permitted then,

 South Jumpers Bastion is a listed structure under Schedule A of the Heritage Trust Act and should be afforded the greatest of protection when it comes to any planning decisions, the GSD would not allow such a structure on the City Walls.

And the battle then widens: “The Government’s weak attempts to excuse its planning record after six years in office by still trying to blame the GSD, rather than responding to the concerns at hand, demonstrates that they have little to say except adopt a scattergun approach to try to deflect the criticism from what is a proposed development that is unacceptable from the point of view of safeguarding our heritage.

The GSD say they have not said that there should not be development or new schools or affordable housing. It has said that development should be heritage sensitive and also be combined by a holistic view of this community and the wider quality of life agenda. Many people are concerned about the noise, dust and pollution caused by constant and extensive development. The Government have chosen in their response to completely ignore the public health concerns raised by the GSD.

Trevor Hammond, GSD spokesman for planning, environment and heritage said “it is not necessary to cite specific developments when the community is judging for itself the planning decisions made by Government. Its refrain that meetings of the Development and Planning Commission are now in public has become a mantra used to excuse Government’s poor judgement, it must further be remembered that Government projects are not subject to the Commission. I hear almost daily, and have done since being elected two years ago, the concerns of residents, unfortunately these fall on deaf ears as projects proceed against their objections and often against the views of the Heritage Trust. Government should also remember that when in opposition, at a time when less development was taking place, they were critical of the amount of construction, it is a hypocrisy for them to now argue the opposite”.