This week in Guyana came news reports about the Junior Calypso Competition for Mashramani drawing some talented performers in the final of the event. While it was heartening to read of the writing and performing talent on display (T’Shanna Cort of Krosskolor Records was the winner) the press reports emphasized the poor sound quality in the event being held in the Cliff Anderson Hall, with large sections of the audience unable to hear the singers. In the interest of raising musical standards in the country, it is high time that we stop presenting shows in Guyana in this second-rate fashion. Cliff Anderson is a concrete and metal structure, created to present basketball games, but simply inadequate for musical presentations.
By all reports, the acoustics in the place were such that the judges had to be shifted to an area in the hall where they could properly hear the performers. It is beyond disheartening to be seeing reports in the media about poor sound quality at our music shows at a time when there is frequent chatter about elevating Guyana’s music industry to the level of being competitive on the international scene; the word ‘laughable’ comes to mind. Whoever is responsible for organizing events such as the Calypso Competition should know that those two elements go hand in hand. It is difficult enough for fledgling performers to be dealing with inexperience and nervousness; to additionally saddle them with sub-standard sound is inexcusable. In future, the organisers for such a show must be persons knowledgeable enough to know whatever the Cliff Anderson Sports Hall is meant for, music is not one of them. It is high time we know the difference.
Almost weekly in Guyana we read of daylight robberies carried out on persons travelling from banks with millions of dollars in cash. While it is high time that police assistance in controlling such crimes be provided, it is equally high time for ordinary citizens to stop this mindless practice of leaving banks with huge amounts of cash stuffed sometimes simply in paper bags. About a month ago, I stood in line in a Georgetown bank and saw a customer at the teller, withdraw $700,000 in local bills, put half in his right pants pocket, half in his left, pull his shirt down over his waist, and calmly walk out of the bank – alone. Last week, I was in another bank. A woman, ahead of me, with a gym bag by her feet, withdrew one million Guyana, stacked the bills in her bag, in public view, zipped it shut, and walked out – alone. It is not as if the likelihood of being robbed is not known. We read of such things, almost on a weekly basis, and the word-of-mouth on these incidents is widespread. Why are persons doing transactions with huge sums involved not using other methods than cash to make payments? Perhaps they are not reading their newspapers or listening to current gossip. It is high time they begin. Their financial standing or their very life, could be at stake.
Also this week in Guyana every media outlet is awash with the news of the massive street protests outside City Hall with regard to the implementation of the controversial parking meter project for Georgetown. The protests are remarkable for the high number of persons turning out, most of them alerted via social media, and also for the wide cross-section of citizens represented; persons from all walks of life are out there – from business owners to taxi drivers; from big shots to small fry. Less obvious, but just as remarkable, however, is that behind the controversy we are seeing yet again another example of the widespread lack of systems, in both government and private sector, causing untold disruption and failings in our economy. Given that there is clearly a need for government to start tackling the problem of parking in Georgetown, which is growing more congested daily, it is therefore simply astonishing to anyone paying even passing attention to this issue, that there was an absence of standard business procedures or systems in formulating this project. Information to the public was sparse and contradictory, and there was no attempt to determine affordability. The uproar now facing government – with calls for the current project to be scrapped and an exhaustive review to be undertaken – could have been avoided by simply adopting an open and systematic approach to the project. It appears there is no such system in place at City Hall. It is high time for one.
