Responding to a question from MP Arvin Boolell, Transport Minister Alan Ganoo indicated that it was solely for reasons of “safety and security” that the decision was taken to begin metro operation at 2 p.m. Last May 1st. He also maintained that he can, like the opposition, argue that the non-operation of the metro during the morning penalized the government, which could have gathered a crowd of 35,000 people.

“For security reasons, a press release was issued on April 31 to inform the public that the light rail operation would begin at 2 p.m. This decision was taken due to the simultaneous holding of several political meetings in strategic locations such as Vacoas, Port-Louis, Rose-Hill, St Jean and Quatre-Bornes, located along the light rail corridor,” explains Alan Ganoo.

He continued that it was anticipated that many people would use the metro to get to these meetings. “The proximity of these gatherings to the light rail represented a high risk, particularly due to the potential for pedestrians to cross the tracks, which could have resulted in injuries or even deaths. In addition, there was a risk of confrontations and hostilities between supporters during boarding, which could lead to material damage and attacks on staff,” underlines the Minister of Transport to explain the decision to delay the start of the operation. The PTr deputy then argued “whether it was deliberate or not, knowing that the PTr and its allies would attract a large crowd, what you did goes against the will of the electorate,” said Arvin Boolell.

Alan Ganoo was quick to respond. ” I am amazed. After strongly criticizing the metro project and even publicly announcing that the government should put an end to this project, members of the opposition now feel aggrieved by the non-operation of the light metro. 'Aste metro!' “, he quips.

He also returned to the fact that the opposition used the argument of the non-operation of the metro. “This argument was used to justify the disappointing crowd in Port Louis, where 6,000 people were mobilized despite a costly campaign. If I use this reasoning, I can also argue that the meeting in Vacoas was also penalized because the Vacoas metro station is close to the meeting location. If we had allowed the supporters to be transported to Vacoas, this means that the crowd of 30,000 in Vacoas could have increased to reach 35,000,” says Alan Ganoo.

Leave a reply below

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Contact Business

Captcha Code