Noise pollution
Editorial
Kaieteur News
April 5, 2007
The introduction of the minibus solved the problem of public transportation, which had become a horror story by the eighties. But as with most societal innovations, there were unforeseen consequences. In this instance the changes were so far-reaching and extensive that it spawned what has been dubbed a whole new culture – the “minibus culture”.
One aspect of this new culture that has earned the ire of most citizens has been the insistence of many bus operators to play their music at such a level that there is no question that serious damage is being inflicted on the eardrums of those long suffering souls. This is noise pollution at its worse.
One might question as to why these citizens still continue to use the offensive buses but the reality is that they have very little choice, given the constraints of the ubiquity of the noisy rides and the need to get from point A to point B in as short a time as possible. The choices are just not there.
There have been sporadic efforts of the authorities to deal with the problem but these have all petered out without any noticeable effect on reducing the noise pollution. The Police mounted an operation a year or so ago to have the offensive equipment removed from the buses but it was soon discontinued.
In Parliament, the issue of noise pollution in minibuses is one of the very few where there has been complete unanimity in the positions of the Government and the Opposition. One would have thought that by now they would have cooperated to resolve this issue to begin the process of building the “trust” which they insist is necessary for resolving our larger political impasse, if for nothing else. But the beat in the buses continues at ear-splitting decibels.
Unfortunately, the minibus culture, like most cultures, has not remained confined to its originating group: the noise pollution feature has been transmitted by its practitioners into new byways. While the minibuses usually plied the major roads and highways, the noise pollution has now invaded the streets and alleys of the villages and towns.
We have the growing phenomenon of cars being equipped with such huge stereo equipment that in some instances their back seats have to be removed to accommodate the sets. The drivers of the cars blast their music as they meander through sedate villages with such vigour that the walls of homes actually vibrate. What is the homeowner to do?
But the problem of noise pollution goes far beyond the “minibus culture” crowd and their mostly youthful followers. Numerous and persistent letters to the press have complained of one surprising new source: the religious communities.
Almost every village has a Masjid and one Muslim practice is to call their members to prayers five times a day. In the past, these calls were made by an official; a loud voice from a high point of the mosque. Of recent, amplifying equipment has been introduced which guarantees that all and sundry who live in the village know when it is time for the Muslim prayer.
For most folks, the calls during the day and in the early evening pass by without comment but the one that has provoked accusations of noise pollution is the call made at approximately five in the morning, before sunrise. The sudden blast of the amplified call has startled many a non-Muslim out of their slumber, and precipitated their displeasure. In some Hindu Mandirs and Christian Churches, there is usually amplified singing of prayers which have proven just as annoying and disturbing to surrounding non-believers. The usually law abiding religious practitioners obviously do not think they are creating a problem.
And indeed the constitution allows for religious freedom. In Muslim countries, everything grinds to a halt when the calls from the various minarets sound. In Guyana, people have complained about the amplified sounds coming from the Christian churches and the law authorities have actually asked the churches to be temperate. These days the new churches are being built with sound-proofing so as not to be a nuisance.
But for the greater part we are a tolerant people and we allow the churches to conduct their business undisturbed, especially since the perceived disturbances do not last for an unusually long time and are not as frequent during any given week.
We could go on to include the noise pollution emanating from the “wall” of speakers that are now standard in many drinking spots across the country that make lives a living hell for those unfortunate enough to live close by. These go well into the night and disturb or prevent many a slumber.
But we believe the point has been made that noise pollution is very pervasive in our country and the authorities need to make a concerted and sustained effort to address the issue before we all have a collective breakdown.