Hyatt hiccup

WHETHER you support the government’s cashless policy mandate or not, the way the state-owned Hyatt Regency Hotel announced, and then ineptly retracted, a new cash-free policy on October 5 left a lot to be desired.

As observed by Finance Minister Colm Imbert on October 7, the government has no role in the day-to-day operations of the hotel, which is managed by the Chicago-based Hyatt Hotels Corporation. There is a formal separation, even if the property is ultimately tied to Udecott.

Yet the truth is this affair was an embarrassment to both the hotel and the cabinet.

That Hyatt proved itself out of step with the ongoing debate over the appropriateness of the cashless policy was perhaps forgiveable, assuming it wished to mirror the policy position of the state, which Mr Imbert strongly re-articulated on September 30 in his budget.

It was under no obligation to do so.

However, going cashless on November 1 would have allowed it to appear forward-thinking and align it with an ongoing digital transformation. The hotel already uses digital check-in and digital keys.

What was grossly offensive, though, was that management singled out its apparent willingness to accept – still – US dollars, British pound sterling, and euros, while blanking TT notes.

There is obviously much pressure on foreign-exchange distribution in the country, and any move which acknowledges that is understandable.

But the objective of going “cash-free” is all but completely undermined by accepting other cash currencies.

Worse, it sends a signal of disenfranchisement at a time when there is much cabinet-generated discussion about the legacy of colonialism in our society.

As much as Mr Imbert is correct in noting he has no direct oversight role over hotel operations, the matter was also an embarrassment for the government, given the symbolic importance of the Hyatt.

Located at the International Waterfront Centre, which houses several ministries and the judiciary, the facility is a marquee feature of the skyline of our capital city. It is owned by the country’s premier urban development entity. Time after time, major government events are held in the hotel, by ministries, state agencies and statutory bodies. A major regional symposium on crime was held there only last year.

That such a venue would resort to such a seemingly discriminatory measure is reason for the government to blush.

Mr Imbert’s announcement that his ministry “will investigate the currency aspect of the matter” requires further explanation, but, for the moment, succeeds in telegraphing what might have been the real thinking behind the move to retain US bills.

Yet that is not what Hyatt management itself has said, stating over the weekend that the move was part of an announcement that was “prematurely distributed with inaccurate information.”

If so, the ineptitude was a four-star failure.