Sidebar

19
Fri, Apr

Typography

Is it permitted to mention the name Lee Kwan Yew on Carnival Monday?

Really, I don't know why people get offended whenever any discussion anywhere happens to swing around to the former Prime Minister of Singapore's reference to us so many years ago as having a Carnival mentality. You would think that we would see such a characterisation as a compliment, even if the man revered as the "Father of the Nation" to the south-east Asian island was speaking in the context of such a preoccupation with revelry being a hindrance to the country's development.

I mean, isn't Carnival we thing? Should it matter what other people, great or small, think so long as we truly believe that the net effect of the festival and everything associated with it is positive, whether financially, socially or in terms of our general sense of well-being? Or is it that, like Kevin Pietersen and other English cricketers (not to mention most of our own West Indian "Legends") now trying desperately to convince themselves - certainly not anyone with any semblance of common sense - that they weren't blinded by Sir Allen Stanford's money, we just don't like to face the truth about something that is a masquerade in every sense of the word?

Let's put all of this in the context of the hand-wringing going on right now over the state of the football pitch at the Hasely Crawford Stadium, less than five weeks before Trinidad and Tobago's first home fixture in the final phase of CONCACAF World Cup qualifying against Honduras. Like the embarrassing sandy fiasco of the Sir Vivian Richards Stadium in Antigua ten days ago, this was an accident just waiting to happen.

Before going any further, let me say that I believe all will be well enough by kick-off time on March 28. If it isn't, whether as a result of rain, impeding repairs or a realisation that the scope of work to return the surface to the required standard is far more extensive than first thought, there are no shortage of options given that four stadia were built from scratch and approved by FIFA for the hosting of the 2001 Under-17 World Championships.

And don't forget that we played our first game of the South Africa 2010 campaign last year on the artificial pitch of the Marvin Lee Stadium. Granted we were humiliated 2-1 by Bermuda in that fixture and therefore would not want to return to the scene of such an upset result unless it was absolutely necessary, but surely all the lyrics from football supremo Jack Warner about penalties and sanctions in the midst of his general sense of foreboding when speaking to the media on Saturday was more than a touch of exaggeration from the UNC MP for Chaguanas West.

Anyway these issues, even the supposedly significant matter of World Cup football, are all secondary to questions relating to planning and prioritisation in the context of national development and fostering a real sense of nationhood.

In the first place, the Prime Minister and his Cabinet, who collectively run the country, chose to make two exceptions to Sports Minister Gary Hunt's ban on non-sporting events at the nation's premier sporting venue - Machel Montano's AC7 concert the previous weekend and last Friday night's Soca Monarch Finals.

This decision of itself is not necessarily cause for condemnation, as everywhere in the world - so-called First or so-called Third (I keep asking is there is a so-called Second?) - sports venues of all shapes, sizes and purposes are used for other events. So cussing the government of the day dry so for approving AC7 and Soca Monarch so close to the World Cup qualifier is really unwarranted, assuming all the requisite arrangements were made to minimise damage to the field.

That's really the issue, isn't it? It's all well and good for Hunt to want to impart as much positive spin as possible and talk about finding solutions to the problem instead of harping on the gravity of the challenge. But the question must be asked: Was this a situation that could have been prevented with more effective protection of the playing field?

Surely the answer has to be "yes," for if it is "no," then it means that the decision-makers consciously cast aside all concerns about potential damage and length of time for rehabilitation, choosing instead to let their Carnival mentality hold sway come what may. By the way, any suggestion that the persistent rains could be offered as an unexpected setback is utter nonsense simply because the precipitation, while unseasonal, has been forecast for all of this month.

What about the costs that now have to be borne by us taxpayers to complete repairs? Should we just smilingly accept it as one of the unintended consequences of what Lee Kwan Yew spoke about? I was even thinking that it is now incumbent upon the sports minister to advise the nation as soon as the final figures are calculated about the additional expenditure and how that compares with the revenue, if any,  from staging the two events.

However seeing that it's almost a year since he promised to provide detailed information to Parliament on the Brian Lara Stadium, we could very well be into qualifying for 2014 before such privileged information comes into the public domain, unless of course some irate insider decides to leak the details.

But this is Carnival time, so who could really be vex at carelessness and incompetence when so many others are playing themselves?