Friday, November 10, 2006

Grenada makes significant progress for ICC CWC 2007

Photo Compliments: GrenadaBroadcast
Grenada this week became the latest country to complete enactment of legislations for the hosting of the ICC Cricket World Cup next year. Government and opposition senators gave the final approval of the Sunset Legislation which now requires the signature of the Governor General Sir Daniel Williams. During Tuesday’s debate, former Sports Minister Adrian Mitchell, in piloting the bill, highlighted the importance of the game to the region. “What we are looking at is a venture into the sports industry. This is a multi-billion dollar industry in the world,” Mitchell said. The regulations, divided into seven parts containing 59 clauses will according to Mitchell augur well for Grenada and the region for future events. He said the bill is to ensure that all international standards are adhered to and all sectors protected. “I want to say that based on the experience of countries hosting world events like this and based on what we are seeing in the other Caribbean countries it’s necessary for us to come together and work this thing as a country – this is one venue,” he said. Despite some concerns opposition senator Ingrid Rush supported the bill and called for a more vigorous public education programme. “And for all of us who love cricket, I’ll stand with this piece of legislation, I’ll stand with cricket world cup and do whatever I can to make this a success,” Rush told the Senate. “At this time we have to bite the bullet and make sure that cricket world cup is a success and that failure is not an option.” However, Senator Arley Gill, while not opposing the passing of the Sunset Legislation, has accused the government of failing the nation by the late passage of the bill. “You are one week late in passing this important piece of legislation,” Gill told the government side. He said, “In preparation for cricket world cup the stadium is not the only requirement. One of the requirements is the Sunset Legislation before us that ought to have been passed by November 1.”

No comments: