• Dionisio: He and Royal Caribbean ‘can now co-exist’

• Sought reduced RCL land footprint to when in office

• ‘Supportive’ of both; ‘anchors’ cruise giant in Nassau

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

A former Cabinet minister yesterday said the Bahamian entrepreneur battling to restore Paradise Island’s lighthouse should be given “some preference” now that his project can easily “co-exist” with Royal Caribbean’s.

Dionisio D’Aguilar, minister of tourism and aviation in the Minnis administration, told Tribune Business there was now “sufficient real estate” for both Toby Smith’s Paradise Island Lighthouse and Beach Club venture and the cruise giant’s destination to proceed given that the latter has cut its Crown Land demands.

Disclosing that this was a solution he had pushed when in office, he argued that Mr Smith should receive some reward for 12 years’ “in the trenches” through being awarded all the necessary approvals to proceed with plans to restore Paradise Island’s lighthouse and develop his own ‘beach break’ destination for guests.

Voicing optimism that any “bad blood” between Mr Smith and Royal Caribbean over their Crown Land fight will “heal over time”, Mr D’Aguilar told this newspaper: “I was supportive of both of them. It’s good that they could both co-exist, and it seems as if Royal Caribbean, which initially asked for seven Crown Land acres, has reduced their requirements down to four.

“That leaves a position for Toby’s project to move forward if they can both co-exist, and it seems a happy medium has now been reached.... There may be bad blood between them, but there’s sufficient real estate for both projects to co-exist, and I’m sure the bad blood will heal over time and they will happily co-exist next to each other.

“They certainly have the real estate now, and the Government is assessing what to do with the portion of beach no longer needed by Royal Caribbean. Toby certainly has done his time in the trenches trying to secure it, so I would like to believe he has some preference.”

The Davis administration, though, has requested that Mr Smith “reapply” for the necessary government permits and approvals so that his project can proceed. It took that stance after the Supreme Court ruled the Paradise Island Lighthouse and Beach Club principal did not possess a valid, binding Crown Land lease for the collective five acres he was seeking on Paradise Island’s western end.

That five acres was split into two parcels, one for three acres and the other involving two acres. The latter was also sought by Royal Caribbean for its project, drawing it into conflict with Mr Smith, amid assertions that the former Minnis administration had effectively ‘double dealt’ the same Crown Land to two separate, different investment ventures.

Royal Caribbean executives recently said they reduced their Paradise Island Crown Land demands by 43 percent in a bid to “untangle ourselves” from any “conflict” with Mr Smith who, while now appealing the Supreme Court’s verdict to the Court of Appeal, has also reaffirmed to the Government his commitment to proceed after obtaining “proof of financing” in excess of $7m.

Mr D’Aguilar said yesterday of Mr Smith: “The Government is now saying he needs to reapply and start all over. I don’t know if they gave him the expectation they were supportive and, once there was a resolution Royal Caribbean to reduce their needs, that would immediately translate into finalising his project. It seems that’s his view, but is not the view of the Government, which has said to reapply.

“That was always my position; that they could always co-exist. When I was in office I requested that Royal Caribbean reduce their ask. ‘Why do you not take five acres, and Toby take five acres?’ They wanted seven. I said: ‘Jesus, you’re going to have this big battle over seven acres. We should be able to accommodate both projects.”

The former tourism minister said that, based on Royal Caribbean’s public comments, it appeared as if the cruise giant was now taking the approach that ‘if Toby wants to go for it, go for it’. He added, though, that he is also backing the cruise giant’s $110m Royal Beach Club investment on the basis that it “anchors” or locks the cruise line into consistently calling on Nassau given that it will have a vested financial interest in the destination.

The Davis administration has sought to build upon, and enhance, the deal left by its predecessor through what is being billed as a “first-of-its-kind” public-private partnership (PPP) model with Royal Caribbean. The Government will convert the four Crown Land acres into an equity stake in the project and, collectively with Bahamian investors, will hold a 49 percent interest in the Royal Beach Club. Entrepreneurial and employment opportunities for locals have also been boosted.

“We’re beginning to understand, for the very first time, that the cruise companies need us as much as we need them,” Mr D’Aguilar told Tribune Business. “It’s not such a one-sided relationship any more, and we’re finally beginning to understand the power of our geography.

“If you’re doing three or four-night cruises out of the busiest cruise ports in the world, Miami, Fort Lauderdale and Canaveral, The Bahamas is almost certainly going to have to be part of the itinerary and gives us a certain leverage that St Lucia doesn’t have. When you have that leverage, you can extract a better deal.”

Pointing to Nassau Cruise Port’s $132m bond offering memorandum, which stated that the ever-increasing number of passengers going on short three and four-day cruises was to The Bahamas’ advantage, Mr D’Aguilar added that the Prince George Wharf operator is forecasting it will handle 4.1m-4.2m passengers in 2023 and up to 4.5m-4.6m in 2024.

With this growth, he argued that there will be sufficient passenger volumes to satisfy Bay Street merchants and all cruise-reliant businesses despite the Royal Beach Club’s addition in 2025. “You cannot allow your attractions and offerings to remain static,” the former tourism minister told this newspaper. “You have more people coming, and if you want them to come off the vessel you have to offer them more and interesting excursions, and things to do.

“At what point do you say, ‘yes, we’re going to allow one more project’. I’m of the view that there’s enough passengers coming to go around all the businesses, and we have to keep expanding and offering more interesting things. Bahamians are going to be part-owners of these excursions. Yes, it’s going to be empowering Bahamians.”

Disclosing that he supports the Royal Beach Club for that very reason, Mr D’Aguilar added: “Most importantly, it anchors Royal Caribbean to the port of Nassau. When they are deciding their cruise itineraries, if they have a financial interest in an excursion in a particular port, they are more minded to include it in their itineraries than locations where they don’t have an interest. This ties them to the port of Nassau. Not that we have a problem attracting people.”

Royal Caribbean has pledged to increase the number of passengers it brings to Nassau by 150 percent come 2027, growing the total from one million per annum in 2019 to 2.5m by that year. It has also said that more than 60 percent of this number will not set foot at the Royal Beach Club.

Mr D’Aguilar, though, agreed that Royal Caribbean’s Paradise Island development will stand or fall based on its ability to address all potential environmental issues. He declined to voice an opinion on this, asserting that the issues were best addressed by the Department of Environmental Planning and Protection (DEPP) and specialists in the field.