. . . It is the view of the Government that the cultural sector is more than Crop Over and NIFCA . . . . The cultural sector has the potential to be a catalyst for sustained economic development and must be seen as an important addition to a much needed broadened economic base. – Minister of Culture Stephen Lashley at the opening of the annual two-day art symposium facilitated by the National Cultural Foundation.
IT?WOULD?BE?USEFUL if the Minister of Culture could afford us an interpreter. Outside the stated fact that culture is certainly more than Crop Over and NIFCA, his other mouthings challenge understanding.
More gobbledegook yet is Mr Lashley’s admonition to artistes that “the challenge as to how meaningful this sector [presumably the mythical cultural industry] will be to our economic prosperity and the maintenance of our cultural industry must be yours to shape. All participants in this sector must seriously step up to the plate and rededicate themselves to moving to the next level”.
Surely, before Barbadian artistes can step up, they must know what it is they are doing it for. The only person who is aware – questionably – is the minister himself.
Boasts he: “It is clear to me that the NCF must be reshaped and retooled to respond better to the demands of the emerging creative sector.”
Reshaped to what? Retooled with what? What “emerging creative sector”? What about the creative people who were here ever since?
What of the calypso tents – members of the “creative sector” actually – which with annual declining sponsorship and Government financing has been asking for a waive on the VAT?
Elsewhere, Minister of Finance Chris Sinckler has had the matter “under active consideration” for some time. Meanwhile, a source “close” to Mr Sinckler’s ministry already knows the minister’s “active consideration” will come to nothing.
Says the source, the Government simply cannot afford to ease tent managers. This might have been excusable, if not tolerable, if the source had not pursued an unhomogeneous explanation.
This misled source charges that while tent managers were giving the impression VAT was paid by them, it really came from patrons, or “customers”, as he preferred.
In fairness to tent managers, declining sponsorship has meant greater dependency on the door ticket, which has reached its ceiling of about $30 a show. Tents just cannot raise entrance fees, as supermarkets raise prices when overheads go up, to compensate for decreased sponsorship and rising costs.
It might be feasible if a tent held only one show; but it produces several for a season as part of the “creative sector” for Crop Over.
That the cultural directorate needs to be reshaped is probably desirable; but what are more urgent are powers that be who take practical, decisive and correct action, and who truly have a passion for the arts; not a lotta long-talk!
