Portmore Boycott...

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Portmore Boycott...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Is there an offset between the cost of wear and tear and gasoline vs. the cost of the toll on the causeway? Does it make economic sense to travel the mandela highway vs. the toll road? Just asking [img]/forums/images/graemlins/70402-thinking.gif[/img] [img]/forums/images/graemlins/70402-thinking.gif[/img] [img]/forums/images/graemlins/70402-thinking.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]\

No it does not make sense, with all the people on the boycott path, everybody a bun more gas, and wear down dem cyar. But sometimes yuh haffi suffah fi mek a point. Although the contract is already signed, so what can happen?

[/ QUOTE ]

There is still a Court case.
BTW I don't support a boycott.
I would do as this letter writer suggested.

LETTER OF THE DAY - The real reason for Portmore toll
published: Saturday | July 15, 2006

THE EDITOR, Sir:

THE PORTMORE toll has been set at $60 (minimum) for a very good reason. Fundamentally, the road network which handles Portmore traffic has not changed. Marcus Garvey Drive and Spanish Town Road are still dual carriage ways. Hagley Park Road is still a two-way road above the intersection with Waltham Park Road. In fact, the new toll road is the same two lanes of traffic that the causeway was during rush hour.

What the establishment of the toll road has done is to worsen the existing situation. Two lanes of high speed traffic are now going to merge with an existing road network which has a speed limit of 50 km/hr. It was never going to work.

GRIDLOCK AT THE EXITS

Had the toll been set at a rate that allowed maximum use, including some of those persons who at present use the so-called alternative route, there would be gridlock at the exits during rush hour traffic. The toll is, therefore, meant to discourage maximum use of the road, so that it will appear to work. Those persons who use the toll road will find that their travel time to work has reduced considerably simply because there will be less traffic. They will be interviewed by the media and the JIS and their praises will be used to gauge the success of the project. I suggest that the effect would have been the same if the Government had imposed a toll on the causeway bridge.

What the residents of Portmore need to do is the exact opposite of a boycott. Dig into your pockets and turn up in your numbers at the toll plaza. The resulting crawl could well stretch from Marcus Garvey Drive to the bridge. The amount of time you waste will be the same as if you had used the alternative route via Mandela. The results, however, will be different. By creating gridlock on the toll road, you will demonstrate that the real purpose behind the toll was additional revenue for the Government and had nothing to do with your welfare.

Also, the Government will be forced to widen Marcus Garvey Drive and Hagley Park road or find some other way of improving traffic flow on either end of the toll road just to ease their embarrassment. These improvements can be funded by 'cost overrun' savings. They may even be forced to reduce the toll considerably, for what justification could exist for a toll if your travel times are the same as before?

Understand then, Portmorians, that the Govern-ment is depending on you to boycott the use of the toll road, for this is the only way it can work.

I am, etc.,

Capt. JOHN RICHARDS

Stony Hill

LETTER OF THE DAY - The real reason for Portmore toll

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Portmore Boycott...

[ QUOTE ]
i remember how long it took to build "the new road to Negril" - that went on forever - and then farrins did that road and whiiish you were in Negril in an hour

everytime i take the new road - i think about all the businesses that suffer - yes new businesses opened but . . . just change not necessarily increase

and the toll road also makes me think of Life and Debt

things are not always as the seem on the surface sometimes it is about the new don in town

safe trip (((MG)))
Donikka - meek [img]/forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img] woulda never thought that from your signature [img]/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

The funny thing about Life and Debt, most everyone (except for I), agreed with its supposed conclusions that Globalization was bad for Jamaica.

So then Globalization was bad for Jamaica under the JLP with the 807 Program when thousands of Jamaican workers were employed by companies that were a mixture of foreign and local ownership in a Free Zone Employing thousands of Jamaican workers.

Now Globalization is good, when under the PNP regime thousands of foreign labourers are imported into Jamaica to do simple construction work on these mega highways owned and operated by foreigners.

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Portmore Boycott...

[ QUOTE ]
what im asking about is the speculation that part of the agreement is that the govt not maintain the alternante roads or develop any competing routes/transportation modes.

[/ QUOTE ]

Preliminary Information

Read Preliminary Information PDF.
Scroll down to page 48.
Scroll down to the section on obligations as well.
This is the bidding prelim but all this and more was eventually incorporated into the GOJ/Bouygues Travaux contract.

[mountaingal]

Re: Portmore Boycott...

[ QUOTE ]
it would simply the matter if we keep the arguments locked on the Portmore Toll Issue and the Highway 2000 Project of which it is an integral part. No need to go into modern construction methodology and whether or not this is the time to build toll roads.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wasn’t aware I was arguing anything other than the issue of the toll road and the Hwy project. You read too much into my answers. My original point was that it is quite common for governments to employ foreign contractors for major infrastructure projects. I said this because folks were berating the Jamaican government for doing so in the case of the toll road. Any additional points I made were in response other folks reaction to my original point. You, for example, wondered why the Jamaican government couldn’t have built the road itself, and I simply said maybe at this point it, for whatever reason, it chose not to.

There will always be doubt about big-scale, big-money projects, because for some people, it’s scary to think big – involves too much of a change from what appears familiar and manageable. Maybe some of that is at play in this Portmore issue.

[niceniss]

Re: Portmore Boycott...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
it would simply the matter if we keep the arguments locked on the Portmore Toll Issue and the Highway 2000 Project of which it is an integral part. No need to go into modern construction methodology and whether or not this is the time to build toll roads.

[/ QUOTE ]



There will always be doubt about big-scale, big-money projects, because for some people, it’s scary to think big – involves too much of a change from what appears familiar and manageable. Maybe some of that is at play in this Portmore issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you read carefully and followed the issue you would have seen that your supposition is ridiculous at best.

Portmore ppl are like any other, they dont run from change because they are traditionalists who enjoy the simplicity of familiarity. They are being swindled because it is speculated that due to the high number of vehicles that use that bridge on a daily basis, toll revenues would be tremendous.
Portmore people are irate because they are being victimized as a cash cow. That's the issue, not unfounded speculations about fear of change.

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Portmore Boycott...

[ QUOTE ]
I wasn’t aware I was arguing anything other than the issue of the toll road and the Hwy project. You read too much into my answers. My original point was that it is quite common for governments to employ foreign contractors for major infrastructure projects.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for telling me this because with Jamaica having the second highest road density in this world that we know, I am 99% sure that there are a number of these roads and related structures that were constructed wholly or in public partnership with the GOJ.

[Seveen]

Re: Portmore Boycott...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i remember how long it took to build "the new road to Negril" - that went on forever - and then farrins did that road and whiiish you were in Negril in an hour

everytime i take the new road - i think about all the businesses that suffer - yes new businesses opened but . . . just change not necessarily increase

and the toll road also makes me think of Life and Debt

things are not always as the seem on the surface sometimes it is about the new don in town

safe trip (((MG)))
Donikka - meek [img]/forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img] woulda never thought that from your signature [img]/forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

The funny thing about Life and Debt, most everyone (except for I), agreed with its supposed conclusions that Globalization was bad for Jamaica.

So then Globalization was bad for Jamaica under the JLP with the 807 Program when thousands of Jamaican workers were employed by companies that were a mixture of foreign and local ownership in a Free Zone Employing thousands of Jamaican workers.

Now Globalization is good, when under the PNP regime thousands of foreign labourers are imported into Jamaica to do simple construction work on these mega highways owned and operated by foreigners.

[/ QUOTE ]

globalization is okay if it is a two-way street - but what i see in jamaica is the entry of global products and people into jamaica but no export of jamaica products or people - there's no balance [img]/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[niceniss]

Re: Portmore Boycott...

globilization is not the issue. It is the selling out of a ppl.

[mangoskin]

Re: Portmore Boycott...

on the page 48, it says that disputes will be arbitrated outside ja..

[mountaingal]

Re: Portmore Boycott...

[ QUOTE ]
If you read carefully and followed the issue you would have seen that your supposition is ridiculous at best.

Portmore ppl are like any other, they dont run from change because they are traditionalists who enjoy the simplicity of familiarity. They are being swindled because it is speculated that due to the high number of vehicles that use that bridge on a daily basis, toll revenues would be tremendous.
Portmore people are irate because they are being victimized as a cash cow. That's the issue, not unfounded speculations about fear of change.

[/ QUOTE ]

framing the idea of the toll road as an example of a government swindle is, to some extent, a way of making it a familiar issue, and therefore one easier to handle through familiar means (disgust and distrust of government). the idea that the toll road may be a strategic benefit for the future of Jamaica and Portmore essentially requires a change of thinking, one that would look at the project at a higher level. i can sympathize with the immediate reaction that is being felt in the pocket, and the feeling that government is forcing people to make unwelcome choices about the route into Kingston. but perhaps there is more to this, and maybe people will come around to that in time.

you know, i think that for some people, if another party's government had done this, it would have been seen as a much more impressive accomplishment.

[niceniss]

Re: Portmore Boycott...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you read carefully and followed the issue you would have seen that your supposition is ridiculous at best.

Portmore ppl are like any other, they dont run from change because they are traditionalists who enjoy the simplicity of familiarity. They are being swindled because it is speculated that due to the high number of vehicles that use that bridge on a daily basis, toll revenues would be tremendous.
Portmore people are irate because they are being victimized as a cash cow. That's the issue, not unfounded speculations about fear of change.

[/ QUOTE ]

framing the idea of the toll road as an example of a government swindle is, to some extent, a way of making it a familiar issue, and therefore one easier to handle through familiar means (disgust and distrust of government). the idea that the toll road may be a strategic benefit for the future of Jamaica and Portmore essentially requires a change of thinking, one that would look at the project at a higher level. i can sympathize with the immediate reaction that is being felt in the pocket, and the feeling that government is forcing people to make unwelcome choices about the route into Kingston. but perhaps there is more to this, and maybe people will come around to that in time.


[/ QUOTE ]

You know Mountaingal, I find your statements sterile at best, re the situation. You are making statements without any basis in the reality of what's happening.

Let me dissabuse you of your ignorance:

1) Do you know or have any appreciation of the history of the causeway toll? The original plan/map of "Highway 2000" DID NOT include a toll road on the causeway until a year after the maypen highway revenues were seen and marvelled over.
It was broadcasted, ironically, on tv, that the govt were in awe of the first year generation and as such they speculated on an area with extreme high traffic usage. Portmore!

2)The Portmore toll road was then devised even admist protest from the citizenry.
The funny thing is; All those revenues generated from the bridge wouldnt go to the govt, but instead to a french company for the next 30 years.

3)There is no widening of the roads that lead up to the toll road on either end. once all six lanes of the toll road have been exhausted where will all lead to? Ever heard of bottle-neck?
Marcus Garvey wasnt widened. neither was porthenderson road or the main road into portmore. You heard that the road to half-way-tree (I forget the name) was widened? I haven't.
Those places I've mentioned are known for traffic problems so how is the introduction of a higher flow of traffic going to help?

You are yet to make a case for the toll roads. All you are saying is that globilization is where everyone is going and as such ppl should go along.
That doesnt fly. Where is the benefit of portmore's road being hijacked by the govt and handed over to a foreigner to pay for what they've always owned?

[ QUOTE ]

you know, i think that for some people, if another party's government had done this, it would have been seen as a much more impressive accomplishment.

[/ QUOTE ]

and who might those people be? [img]/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[Q3210]

Re: Portmore Boycott...

[ QUOTE ]
so rich america BUILD toll roads from the outset and ppl pay with glee while poor Jamacia have their taxpaid roads TAKEN OVER but they should also pay to foreigners with glee instead of complain about it, right?

after all, J$60 is only a little fenke fenke US dollar. Maybe you know the comparitive paycheques too. on average they are earning the very same thing an average New Yorker earns, correct?

[/ QUOTE ]

Donny, also the Portmore road is barely how long in length and the bridge that spans both sides of the causeway is no where the wide expanse of space and water beneath the Geo Wash. and other NY bridges.
It is a sinful act what this Govt. has done to us Portmore people.
And by them staying on in power is more sinful to Jamaicans on the whole anywhere, not only in Portmore.
But there we have it, it`s none other than ourselves to blame, it`s we that have voted them in for 17 cosec years now, a whole generation and a half.

Look at the report on Scandals Whitehouse, $US41mill. over run in less than a year!!!
And the Contractor General says its because of a change in design from a Beaches to a Sandals design....naieve naieve ediat the contactor general is just like the majority of the electorate. [img]/forums/images/graemlins/70368-hoppingmad.gif[/img]

[Q3210]

Re: Portmore Boycott...

[ QUOTE ]
From what i have understood... people were encouraged to buy in Portmore... lots of neighborhoods there.. easy access to kingston.. with a free causeway in and out... they bought there.. moved there... with no toll.. so didn't have to consider that into their thinking...

people who occasionally go over the causeway... to go visit in Portmore or to go to hellshire.. a visitor like me.. well who cares the one time 60 dollars....

but if you were to go every single day to work.. want to go home.. run errands... it's a huge price to pay on any wage...

i think better roadways is a good thing.. esp when there can be such a huge build up on that route in and out of town... people leaving in the morning two hours before work.. just to get across... never mind if you were critically ill and had to get to a hospital..

i think there needs to be a break for Portmore residents... either they pay a meager amt.. or none at all... truly is not fair or reasonable to expect them to pay for what was always free before..

peps.. i understand what you were trying to say.. there are tolls all over here.. the difference is we have always been used to it.... no matter which way i go into the city i have to pay.. and it ain't cheap... cost of travel... but it's a choice.. and i didn't move here without factoring that in...

i take tolls as a fact of life.. Portmore residents never had this... so it's quite difficult to think they can just adjust to this added financial pressure

So Q.... you carpooling.. or protesting?? would it be easier to bus it to work.. and back.. or the added hassle of a million stops make it not worth the headache? I know how often you go back and forth.. i can understand your upset.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually I am furious.

[Tuff Gong]

Re: Portmore Boycott...

[ QUOTE ]
on the page 48, it says that disputes will be arbitrated outside ja..

[/ QUOTE ]

Sister what are you looking for?

Anyway this in itself is utter disrespect while the current GOJ is rushing to the so-called Caribbean Court of Justice, the Investors want their case to be heard at the Privy Council.

[niceniss]

Re: Portmore Boycott...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
on the page 48, it says that disputes will be arbitrated outside ja..

[/ QUOTE ]

Sister what are you looking for?

Anyway this in itself is utter disrespect while the current GOJ is rushing to the so-called Caribbean Court of Justice, the Investors want their case to be heard at the Privy Council.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a perfect case for the argument against the CCJ. a conflict of interest...