Fixing a blight of the city

The present frenetic efforts to reverse the disreputable state into which Georgetown – the capital of the “fastest growing economy in the world” – has remained mired, has a monocausal origin. Yes, there are innumerable casual ways in which our citizens dispose of their garbage – which leads to clogged drains, canals and sewers that create floods in large swathes of the city once rain falls during high tide and the kokers are closed. And then there are the vending proliferation which creates the impression that our capital is an unruly collection of shacks. But it all boils down to an M&CC that refuses to perform the job they’re elected to do but insist to play politics. This can be rectified in the Local Government elections due later this year.
We can do worse than begin with the scourge of vending, where recently, the M&CC refused to comply with a court order. We repeat our previous calls of the need for a National Policy on Urban Street Vending that treats the issue in a comprehensive and holistic manner. Vending, dubbed “huckstering”, ballooned in Georgetown directly after the abolition of slavery as the ex-slaves flocked into the capital and soon overran its employment capabilities. The colonial authorities saw them as illegal interlopers that disrupted the flow of traffic and encroached on established tax-paying businesses. Relations were always tendentious. The vendors, however, were providing a very valuable service to their poor compatriots who were more than happy to secure necessities at a more affordable price. The dynamics have not altered appreciably in the present.
Street vending is a worldwide urban phenomenon. In the developed country they are seen as a welcome addition to the landscape while in the third world, they are considered a bane. The difference lies in the recognition of the activity as a legitimate economic endeavour and the concomitant need to regulate and protect it through comprehensive, win-win regulations. Women form the overwhelming majority of vendors, and is a significant source of employment for this often-neglected group. As mentioned above, vendors provide affordable services and good to urban dwellers and visitors. A National Policy on Urban Street Vending has to address these positives against the just as legitimate need to provide security to citizens; absence of congestion; maintenance of public hygiene and unfair competition to tax -paying fixed businesses.
Our challenge is that the M&CC takes an ad hoc approach to urban vending and whenever the problem gets out of hand – due mainly to collusion of those appointed to enforce the rules – draconian measures are resorted to. One particularly flagrant recurring instance is the rescinding of the rules during the busy Christmas period with the unrealistic expectation that the vendors will later depart voluntarily.
Representatives of vendors should be involved in the drafting of and enforcement of the National Policy on Urban Street Vending. Its broad elements would have to include the demarcation of vending zones – which should be city/town specific. ·It should take into account the natural propensity of the Street vendors to gravitate to certain places at certain times in response to patterns of demand for their goods/services. Mobile urban vending could be permitted in all areas even outside the designated vendors’ markets, unless designated as ‘no-vending zone’ through a participatory process. The ‘no-vending zones’ should be notified both in terms of location and time.
While recognising the economic importance of Street Vendors, they will have to acknowledge the need for the crafted policy to be enforced. This is another area where the policy makers will have to be au fait of the reality that the “enforcers” often carry out their tasks quite literally: they become shakedown artists who hustle the hucksters. Representatives of the latter group on the oversight body should temper the excesses.
Street Vendors cannot have it both ways. Areas become commercially attractive through the confluence of a host of factors and established fixed businesses pay exorbitant rates to secure such locations. They will have to accept the parameters of the new Policy or face the consequences.