Residents of Coomacka Mines and other areas in Region 10 (Upper Demerara-Berbice), more so parents of school-age children are seeking the intervention of the relevant authorities to have the David ‘G’ school bus which was gifted to the community under the President’s 5Bs initiative up and running.According to concerned residents of the remote Mines areas, the bus has not been in operation since the beginning of the school term last month, and residents have not been informed about its whereabouts or of anything which might be associatedThe inoperable Coomacka school buswith it.As a result, they noted that it was difficult to send their children to school, given the fact that many students attended schools miles away at Linden and other areas and the cost for transportation was high.Region 10 Chairman Renis Morian, during the hosting of the most recent statutory meeting, noted that he was informed about the issue via complaints from residents.A resident of the community told Guyana Times that parents were frustrated by the situation. “… the parents of some schoolchildren are asking the whereabouts of the David ‘G’ school bus that is supposed to be traversing the Mines area to take children to and from school. Children are being kept at home due to their parents not being able to provide financially for them to be able to go to school.”“Education officials in the Region are not shedding any light about the issue with the bus and why it is not working. Residents need to be informed,” a resident stressed.Meanwhile, the Regional Chairman has asked Councillors and other officials to get involved to rectify the situation, as he pointed out that the Region’s Department of Education was not previously informed of the issue.“I got complaints coming from Coomacka … the Department of Education wasn’t notified that the bus is not working,” he noted.
AD Quality Auto 360p 720p 1080p Top articles1/5READ MORECoach Doc Rivers a “fan” from way back of Jazz’s Jordan ClarksonEven President George W. Bush, at vacation rest, again, was required to slough off evident fatigue and emerge from retreat to express official sorrow in front of media cameras. And this was over the assassination of a woman who is not now even in the Pakistani Cabinet, and indeed, has not been in power for more than a decade. So, why all the fuss about Bhutto? What, after all – to be callous about it – is one more body made dead by terrorism? To offer some perspective, please understand that most Americans know very little about nuclear-powered Pakistan. But we had better start learning. American tax money, to the tune of $25 billion since 9-11, has been helping keep in power that country’s “president,” Pervez Musharraf, a military man. What’s surprising is that so little of this is widely known here. Yet the suicide-bombing assassination of Bhutto has swept across America as story number one. Here is my best guess: Americans are increasingly interested in the topic of the prospect or reality of women in power. For many here, the Bhutto story is about a woman of power more than about the internal politics of Pakistan. PERHAPS it was the ever-present white scarf, wrapped around her head, as if shouting to us that a woman in her particular culture might not have it so easy, especially if she wanted to change things. Or perhaps it was the simple drama of history exerting a powerful pull that was tugging her back from exile to her native Pakistan, even as the severe dangers of such a return seemed daily more evident. Or perhaps the tense and ultimately tragic saga of Benazir Bhutto, facing political crisis in her homeland, attracted America’s attention precisely because of its own impending need to make a major political decision about a high-profile woman of ambition. Whatever the reason, the sound of the pistol bullets that have left Bhutto dead have resounded all over the world – and not the least here in the United States. The Bhutto assassination is a big American news story, bigger than almost any story out of Asia in recent memory. After all, there aren’t that many women of power around the world for us to study. In Argentina there is new President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner. Her comely picture appears just about every second or third day in American publications. Perhaps they are thinking of her as the new Evita. German Chancellor Angela Merkel gets some Western press, though not as much as Fernandez, perhaps because she is not as photogenic, though Germany is more important than Argentina. Elsewhere in Asia, there is President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, the 14th president of the Philippines and the country’s second woman leader (Cory Aquino, 1986 to 1992, was the first). Like Benazir Bhutto when she was last prime minister (1993-96), Arroya has been hit with corruption allegations, too. The Bush administration was aware of the negative talk about Bhutto, but was desperate to fix the leaking dam that has become Pakistan. Musharraf has been losing a lot of legitimacy with the sacking of Supreme Court judges and the widespread jailing of lawyers and journalists. The opposing Pakistan People’s Party, with Bhutto returning from exile, suddenly offered a way for Washington to hedge its Pakistan bet should Mursharraf’s government come apart. The quick-drying glue of an externally imposed coalition regime would be slathered on Pakistan to seal the government from further sliding – and perhaps even falling into the hands of you-know-what kind of people. Bhutto, whether in alliance with Musharraf or not, was supposed to be Plan B, but now Benazir is no more. Benazir was murdered by an extremist madman, while Musharraf watched many miles away. Could he have done more to prevent it? Under the circumstances, that does not seem an unfair question to ask. Benazir was the eldest child of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who founded the Pakistan People’s Party and was president and later prime minister of Pakistan from 1971 to 1977. She always doffed that headscarf, to be sure, but she was no madam of the madrassas. She had been educated at Radcliffe and Harvard (majoring in comparative government, a rather useful subject-matter in Asia), had topped it off with a fancy degree from Oxford, and so was generally regarded as one smart cookie. In recent months, her PPP looked to be gaining sympathy in Pakistan since hardly anyone trusted the Musharraf government (and some of those who openly expressed their distrust wound up in jail.) And so in the world’s eyes, there was the U.S., with all its oft-proclaimed ideals about democracy, once again in bed with a military strongman because of the crisis of the moment. It would be no surprise if Bhutto had been making Musharraf very uncomfortable indeed. But now, no more. UCLA professor Tom Plate is a board member of the Burkle Center on International Relations, a member of the Pacific Council on International Policy, and the author of six books.160Want local news?Sign up for the Localist and stay informed Something went wrong. Please try again.subscribeCongratulations! You’re all set!