The government’s involvement in the planned Chris Brown concert has raised questions about the criteria used to determine which promoters get tax breaks.
Acting Minister of Tourism Irfaan Ali was yesterday quizzed by APNU MP Carl Greenidge, who among other things questioned why the administration withheld approval for some entertainers on the grounds that their lyrics were violent and then gave tax breaks for a concert headlined by someone who actually committed violence.
Greenidge’s question on the controversial issue—which has seen the government coming in for some licks for supporting Brown, who was convicted of battering his then partner Rihanna—saw the House erupting raucously, and Speaker Raphael Trotman cautioning the parliamentarian that Brown was not on trial.
Greenidge asked Ali to provide the House with a report specifically on the extent of the government’s financial involvement and other involvement in the concert. “I am asking this question in the context of financial stringencies which suggest that we are not in a position to fund critical matters such as pension but we seem able to find money for other things,” he noted.
In response, Ali said Greenidge erroneously pre-supposed that there were financial implications of government’s support.
“As Minister of Tourism, I am tasked with ensuring the highest level of traffic to Guyana. So, that the hotels and tourism industry in this country can benefit and that our people can have a expanded tourist product and it is my belief that we ought to work aggressively on finding different formulas and this government stands committed towards working in partnership with the private sector, towards building our various sectors with the full involvement of the private sector and any initiative that seek to expand and improve the tourism product of Guyana. This Minister of Tourism and the Ministry of Tourism will support such an initiative,” Ali said to loud desk thumping from his colleagues.
But Greenidge noted that Ali, at a press conference last week, had said that the government would be giving tax breaks to the promoters. “Mr Speaker, I find it repugnant for the minister to be suggesting that to invite someone who has been accused,” he said, before being prevented from completing the statement as the government members erupted in loud noise and Trotman issued his caution.
“Chris Brown is not on trial or not on trial in this House and if statements [are] to be made… about his character, his past or otherwise, I would ask that we take it outside… and he is not here to defend himself,” Trotman then said, in the midst of the shouts of the government MPs.
Asked to further expand his answer, Ali said that there is an established policy governing the tax breaks given for big events which can be made available.
“Can the minister tell us whether those tax breaks are any different from those that were not extended; whether the criteria [were] any different from those that were not extended to other performers. Because we have to be clear why some people are given tax breaks in circumstances that are problematic. Movado, Bounty Killer and others were not allowed on grounds…that their lyrics were promoting violence… now, apparently, if they promote violence by saying it [is not cool] but if they actually commit violence then they get money,” Greendige said to loud support from members of the opposition, while the government side continued to voice its displeasure.
After the government signalled its support for Brown’s December 26 ‘Unforgettable 2’ concert, women rights groups and individuals came out condemning the government for the move, charging that the administration was not serious about addressing the rising incidents of domestic violence in Guyana.
