Dear Editor,
I’m sitting here wondering if I lack basic comprehension skills or if Minister Henry is suffering from an inability to effectively engage the citizens of this country? On January 30, an article from News Source headlined ‘Mashramani parade route to be extended -Minister Henry’ stated that during a radio interview Minister Henry said her department had listened to the concerns of the people and had decided to have an extended route for the annual Mashramani parade.
I am wondering which set of citizens were they listening to and what did they really hear? I personally have not seen calls for an extension of route, but rather have seen various stakeholders complaining about how the route will affect them. Persons are mainly complaining about the lack of available space along the route for families to sit picnic style as they did along Church Street for many years. Vendors have also been complaining about the limited amount of space that will be available for vending.
One of the main points I continue to hear from Minister Henry and her department relates to ‘security risks’, leaving me to wonder if she is of the view that the security forces are incompetent as it relates to security measures for national events. Note that I’m saying this on the basis that none of those security risks were shared with the public. The explanation given was if the parade were to start at the Bank of Guyana or Camp and Church Streets, move along Church Street and then into D’Urban Park, it would pose a security risk to the Ministry of the Presidency. Must I remind the Minister and her department that there are four government ministries on Brickdam, namely, Public Security, Education, Culture, Youth & Sport, Natural Resources and Public Health. The Ministry of Education alone has four buildings along the route and there is also the Department of Housing from the Ministry of Communities and the Labour Department from the Ministry of Social Protection on Brickdam. I wouldn’t be surprised if I missed a few government buildings, as I have now come to realize how numerous they are. The question is, however, is it that the security concern that applies to the Ministry of the Presidency is not applicable to those other ministries?
I’m wondering if there are security concerns as it relates to the Ministry of the Presidency then why not have a controlled approached as compared to the open affair that I foresee. Now if the route were to take Church Street into Vlissingen Road into D’Urban Park, the area from Regent Street to South Road could be a pathway for floats and revellers alone which should reduce significantly whatever fear there is of having people congregating in front of the Ministry of the Presidency. Instead what we will have is Regent Street and Vlissingen Road being a bus and car terminal for the day which will result in thousands of citizens traversing the path from Regent to D’Urban Park, which I think should be more of a security concern than to have a controlled parade pass through.
Lastly, if there really is a serious security concern about the parade passing the Ministry of the Presidency then shouldn’t there be an even greater concern that the final leg of the parade is at D’Urban Park? I mean sensibly speaking D’Urban Park is a stone’s throw away from the Ministry of the Presidency and will house about twenty thousand plus persons, inclusive of those who will be on the outside. All this has me wondering if Minister Henry is the fit and proper official to run this department; maybe, just maybe, President Granger missed one while considering his cabinet shift.
Yours faithfully,
Clayon F Halley
