KEVON FELMINE

Se­nior Re­porter

kevon.felmine@guardian.co.tt

The con­tro­ver­sy over fund­ing for Di­vali Na­gar 2026 has re­newed calls for a clear na­tion­al cul­tur­al pol­i­cy, amid dif­fer­ing views on how the Gov­ern­ment should sup­port cul­tur­al and re­li­gious events and whether such fund­ing should be guar­an­teed or sub­ject to con­di­tions.

While Prime Min­is­ter Kam­la Per­sad-Bisses­sar main­tains that cut­ting fund­ing for Di­vali Na­gar is fair, giv­en pre­vi­ous cuts to oth­er events, cul­tur­al con­sul­tant Omari Ash­by ar­gues that fair­ness should be based on eq­ui­table rather than equal fund­ing.

The de­bate comes as bmo­bile, Na­tion­al Flour Mills, First Cit­i­zens Bank and Caribbean Air­lines have with­drawn spon­sor­ship from the Na­tion­al Coun­cil of In­di­an Cul­ture’s (NCIC) Di­vali Na­gar, which is ex­pect­ed to cost about $5 mil­lion. The coun­cil is seek­ing about $1 mil­lion from the Gov­ern­ment.

Amid the with­draw­al of spon­sor­ship from the State en­ti­ties, Blue Wa­ters has stepped in as di­a­mond spon­sor for Di­vali Na­gar 2026, which will take place from Oc­to­ber 30-No­vem­ber 7.

For Ash­by, how­ev­er, the is­sue ex­tends be­yond whether Di­vali Na­gar can sur­vive with­out Gov­ern­ment as­sis­tance.

He de­scribes State fund­ing for cul­ture as a right rather than a priv­i­lege and ques­tions why the Gov­ern­ment should stand apart from events that bring the coun­try to­geth­er.

“When the na­tion col­lec­tive­ly par­tic­i­pates in and cel­e­brates these events, how can the State jus­ti­fy stand­ing on the side­lines?”

Ash­by is call­ing for a na­tion­al cul­tur­al pol­i­cy to es­tab­lish clear stan­dards for fund­ing and en­sure con­ti­nu­ity re­gard­less of changes in gov­ern­ment.

Na­tion­al awardee, play­wright and di­rec­tor Vic­tor Ed­wards al­so be­lieves the State should sup­port cul­tur­al events, par­tic­u­lar­ly those that pro­mote the coun­try’s her­itage.

How­ev­er, he in­sists that such fund­ing must be sub­ject to con­di­tions and ac­count­abil­i­ty.

“Any event that is na­tion­al in scope and that serves to pro­mote the cul­tur­al her­itage of Trinidad and To­ba­go should be fund­ed by the gov­ern­ment sim­ply be­cause these events can­not af­ford to pay for them­selves.”

Ed­wards stress­es that gov­ern­ment fund­ing should not be treat­ed as an en­ti­tle­ment.

He favours a cost-shar­ing arrange­ment un­der which the State pays a per­cent­age of the cost while or­gan­is­ers raise the re­main­der.

Mean­while, Vi­jay Ma­haraj, sec­re­tary gen­er­al of the Sanatan Dhar­ma Ma­ha Sab­ha, takes a dif­fer­ent ap­proach to gov­ern­ment fund­ing, say­ing his or­gan­i­sa­tion does not de­pend on the State or State en­ti­ties for fi­nan­cial sup­port and does not ex­pect such as­sis­tance year af­ter year.

“Is Car­ni­val ex­pect­ing every year? They get every year.”

Ma­haraj said or­gan­i­sa­tions ap­ply­ing to the Min­istry of Cul­ture sign a con­tract and must ac­count for the mon­ey they re­ceive. He ar­gues, how­ev­er, that the larg­er prob­lem is po­lit­i­cal in­ter­fer­ence in the al­lo­ca­tion of fund­ing.

He said the Hin­du com­mu­ni­ty and the Sanatan Dhar­ma Ma­ha Sab­ha had suf­fered po­lit­i­cal vic­tim­i­sa­tion, point­ing to Ra­dio and TV Jaagri­ti’s li­cence ap­pli­ca­tion, which was filed in 2000 and grant­ed on­ly af­ter a Privy Coun­cil case in 2006.

Al­though he would like to see an in­de­pen­dent body es­tab­lished to over­see cul­tur­al fund­ing, Ma­haraj re­mains scep­ti­cal that it would be free from po­lit­i­cal in­ter­fer­ence.

“I still feel that there will be in­ter­fer­ence. I’ve ex­pe­ri­enced it over the last 45 years.”