CELPIP Listening Part 5 Practice Test: Festival Security Staffing Debate

woman1: So, Theo, you really think volunteers in matching vests will suffice for a crowd this size?

man1: Priya, I do. Hiring professional guards risks giving the festival an unnecessarily heavy-handed atmosphere.

woman2: That's a romantic view, Theo, but with alcohol on site, our liability exposure shifts considerably.

woman1: Maya's right — the moment we serve drinks, the calculus changes and volunteer goodwill won't insulate us legally.

man1: Sure, but trained guards at every corner could make attendees feel scrutinized rather than welcomed. That's a real cost too.

woman2: What if we positioned professionals only at the entrances? We control bag checks there without saturating the whole venue.

woman1: I find that sensible — a measured presence at gates, with volunteers handling wayfinding and minor questions inside.

man1: I could entertain entrance-only, provided the guards aren't visibly armed or wearing tactical gear that frightens families.

woman2: That's reasonable. Most reputable firms offer a community-event uniform, not the intimidating sort you're picturing.

woman1: There's still the matter of cost. Professional coverage, even for entrances alone, will eat into our modest budget.

man1: That's why I keep returning to volunteers. Every dollar spent on guards is a dollar away from programming.

woman2: I'd argue it's the opposite — one incident with no professional response and our insurer drops us next year.

woman1: Maya makes the stronger case, although I wonder whether attendees might read uniformed guards as a tension signal.

man1: That's been my concern throughout. Parks should feel like parks, not checkpoints on a Saturday afternoon.

woman2: Then let's brief the guards specifically on visible friendliness. Posture and tone shape perception more than uniforms do.

woman1: Fine. I'll get three quotes for entrance-only coverage and Maya can confirm the insurance language by Wednesday.