Was the Hon harold Dalson a prophet?

During the 2010 Budget debate, an exchange in the House of Assembly between the district reps of Soufriere and Choiseul/Saltibus resulted in the former labelling to the latter as “Minister Ti Canal”. The exchange  centred around issues raised by Hon Dalson on the design criteria for the construction of physical infrastructure. He cited the Union Vale Bridge which the Hon Bousquet had touted as an achievement as an example.  Well, four months later the bridge at Union Vale went down during the heavy rains at the end of August and is up to now still unrepaired.

Undoubtedly, this bridge was an important link for commuters who used the route via De Ville to get to Soufriere. Now these commuters have to go through either Mongouge or Ravineau (depending where they start) and backtrack all the way to Victoria.

This Union Vale Bridge project underlines the importance of design criteria when building physical infrastructure. Design criteria are state standards that designers should meet in designing some system or device. Those criteria should have taken into consideration factors such as the potential maximum volume flow rate of the river and host of what is referred to as “relevant geotechnical considerations”. Apparently, that was not the case

In hindsight, Hon Dalson’s designation of his parliamentary colleague as “Minister Ti Canal” turns out to be painfully true. Was Hon Dalson a prophet in that regard?