A controversy has erupted in the aftermath of this year’s Carni val float parade, with prominent float makers levelling allegations of ma nipulation, political interference and administrative misconduct in the dec laration of results. Several aggrieved participants have now announced a boycott of future government-organ ised float parades unless corrective measures are taken. Addressing a press conference in Margao, veteran float designer Raul Pereira from Quepem — known for crafting some of the most acclaimed floats over the past 27 years — al leged that the results were ‘fab ricated and politically motivated’. He claimed that he and a few other groups were deliberately denied prizes after raising concerns about the organisation and management of the event before the start of the carnival festival. “This is an incorrect result declared by the tourism department and CCP management,” Pereira alleged.
“Our music and performances were overlooked. I blame the tourism department and the minister. The results are wrong, fabricated and manipulated. Revenge was taken be cause we filed complaints. Politics is being played. We have decided to boycott future parades unless the government sets things right,” Pereira added. Another float maker, Adrian Chiquito, criticised what he described as ‘inhuman treatment’ of participants, pointing to glaring lapses in planning and time management. Ac cording to him, float makers were instructed to report at 11 am, while the parade began only at 5.30 pm instead of the scheduled 3.30 pm. The event, he said, continued until nearly midnight in Panjim, causing hardship for artists and workers. “Floats are for the people. The Carnival parade started in 1967 and has nothing to do with religion or the Portu guese. In Panjim, the parade went on until 11 pm. It was to tal torture for us. We are very disappointed,” Chiquito said. He further alleged that the delay in starting the parade to accommodate political leaders was unacceptable. “Floats are meant for the public, not to entertain political leaders,” he added. Savio Rebello, another float maker, questioned the cred ibility of the judging process, alleging that non-Goans un familiar with the State’s cultural context were appointed as judges. “If the judges do not understand Goan culture and tra ditions, what about our hard work and effort?” he ques tioned, adding that the credibility of the judging process must be reviewed. The float makers also accused the Carnival committee of failing to address their grievances despite repeated rep resentations. They argued that local artists, who invest months of labour and substantial funds into designing elaborate floats, deserve transparency, fairness and insti tutional respect. The controversy has triggered strong reactions from the public. Several citizens have expressed solidarity with the float makers, asserting that Carnival is a celebration of Goan identity and creativity that must remain insulated from polit ical interference. “Carnival belongs to the people of Goa. If artists feel cheated, the government must conduct an independent in quiry,” said Ryan Fernandes, a Margao resident. Others pointed to recurring delays and administrative lapses in recent years. “If participants are asked to report at 11 am and made to wait for hours, it is unfair. Proper planning is needed,” said another spectator who attended the parade. However, a section of the public has urged restraint and dialogue. “Instead of boycotting, both sides should sit to gether and resolve the matter. Carnival is too important for Goa’s tourism and culture to be overshadowed by contro versy,” said local businessman Jacinto Rodrigues. With allegations of fabrication, political vendetta and mismanagement now in the open, pressure is mounting on the tourism department to respond. As the dispute es calates, the credibility of the Carnival’s organising frame work — and the government’s stewardship of a flagship cultural event — is under intense scrutiny.
