Dear Editor,

Just imagine being elderly or physically challenged and visiting a government institution to conduct legitimate business only to be told the service you need is located upstairs and there are no other means of getting to the destination but by a flight of stairs.

That was my recent experience at the St Catherine Municipal Corporation. I visited the corporation to submit a drawing for approval on behalf of someone who is currently not on the island. I was directed upstairs to make the payment because the cashier is located there. I enquired what arrangements were in place for people with disabilities who may not be unable to climb the stairs. I was told the building is an old historical structure and there are no provisions in place to accommodate people who are so physically challenged.

I was very alarmed by the response from the staff member. I further observed there was not even a ramp in place on the ground floor for a physically challenged person to access the building.

While the age and historical nature of the building may explain why accessibility features were not included originally, surely this cannot be an acceptable explanation in 2026.

What makes the situation even more ironic is that the municipal corporation is responsible for reviewing and approving building plans and ensuring developments meet the necessary standards. Accessibility for people with disabilities and the elderly should, therefore, be a fundamental consideration.

Shouldn’t the institution responsible for determining what an accessible building should look like be setting this example itself?

For an able-bodied person like me, trying to climb the stairs is a challenge, so it would be that much more challenging for someone with a serious mobility limitation. These limitations are significant barriers to people wanting to access an essential public service.

This is not about asking for special treatment, but about providing the basic amenities for the people who are physically challenged to be able to access the services provided by the Government. It is about dignity, equality, and providing reasonable access to public services.

I am, therefore, respectfully calling on the relevant authority to address these shortcomings wherever they exist and, in particular, the St Catherine Municipal Corporation to urgently examine the accessibility of the corporation’s building and determine what practical measures can be implemented.

If structural modifications are difficult because of the building’s historical status, alternative arrangements should be provided so the physically challenge and elderly are not disadvantaged in accessing these services.

Jamaica cannot promote inclusion while allowing public institutions to remain inaccessible to vulnerable citizens. The gatekeepers of accessibility must first pass the test themselves.

Let us make accessibility more than a requirement on a building plan. Let us make it a reality in the public buildings where Jamaicans go to receive essential services.

Aubyn Perkins

aubyn.perkins@hotmail.com