Dear Editor,
I congratulate Stella on her column in Kaieteur News, Sunday February 25 in which she made four basic points about the forced removal of the vendors from outside Stabroek Market. Three of them have been made by others: that the vendors have paid to be there; that they spent money “sprucing up” their stands in order to capitalize on Cricket World Cup; and that the cleaning up and the beautification now underway should have been done for the people of Guyana and not have to wait until we wanted to be attractive to tourists.
But the fourth point Stella made has been largely neglected: “I am all for progress” she said, “but not at the expense of culture – and Stabroek Market is part of Guyana’s cultural experience.” I hope no one will respond to this by snidely suggesting that she is saying that the dirt and confusion which are part of what we see outside Stabroek Market are our culture. She is saying that underneath the dirt and the confusion, which can and must be cleaned up, there is something which is alive and vibrant and as Guyanese as the Stabroek Market building itself, and which ought to be preserved and built.
I will return to this point later but first there are two other points I want to add based on interviews, including with vendors, and on media reports; I feel able to rely on these reports since those quoted have not said that the media have misrepresented them.
1. Not only have the vendors been made the victims of the dysfunctional relations inside the M&CC and between one faction in City Hall and the Central Government; but the Central Government is making decisions that surely are the domain of the City Council
Look at the sequence of statements by and positions of the various authorities and then look at who contradicts who. Here is a summary:
Late in January or early February the Mayor said that the vendors could stay and sell during CWC provided they had clean, well-painted stalls and clean uniforms and surroundings. On February 19 in a press conference the City Engineer and the City Clerk disassociated themselves from this, said it was not an official position, and added that the M&CC was working with the Ministry of Public Works and Communications “to bring order to the area”. On February 20 the Deputy Mayor disassociated himself from the decision by the City Clerk to move the vendors, and referring to a meeting at the Office of the President which he said involved members of the Georgetown Enhancement Committee, explained that the meeting had decided that the vendors would be allowed to sell from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. and they would have to spruce up. The Deputy Mayor said he had cautioned the meeting that some of the vendors had been paying taxes for the areas they occupy. On the same date the vendors met with 17 members of the M&CC who voted unanimously that they should be allowed to return to their spots and sell, and four vendors who went to the High Court to block the M&CC from moving them were granted an injunction. At some point of this chaos two Ministers weighed in: the Minister of Public Works and Communications pronounced that “we” had taken a decision to move them; and the Minister of Local Government said that the eviction of the vendors was part of a wider initiative by the government to restore the image of the capital city and that the Stabroek Market area would be cleared. He added that arrangements were in train to find “appropriate places” for the vendors and that in the short run vendors will be allowed to continue to sell under firm guidelines.
Who or where is the source of authority for decisions related to the city? I am no lawyer, but surely the City Clerk and the City Engineer are by statute supposed to implement the decisions of the Council? And as far as the Central Government is concerned, even if we accept its underlying argument that it is cleaning up a mess caused by an incompetent and dysfunctional City Council, surely the answer cannot be to simply override the Council’s decisions? Does the law permit this? If not, does the law not matter?
2. Removing the vendors is quite simply unethical
Outside the Stabroek Market there are vendors with permanent structures and vendors who set up on a daily basis. Both groups have tried in different ways to abide by conditions set for them to sell in that location.
Among those with permanent structures are some who have been there since 1975. There are vendors WHO INHERITED THEIR STRUCTURES. I put the words in caps not only to underscore how long those vendors have been there but because I am thinking of the woman vendor who said in a TV interview “I raise my children from this and my mother raise me from this.” That is the legacy that the grassroots women in her family have passed down through generations. Vendors have paid rates and taxes, some for as long as 20 years. There are vendors who have been granted liquor licences and vendors who have been awarded City health certificates, an act which surely demonstrates that the City assessed what they were doing as conforming with what was required of them. One structure has an air conditioning unit. Yet these women and men were given seven days notice to remove their furniture and fixtures so that their buildings could be razed. This is morally, socially and surely, legally, unacceptable.
The itinerant vendors, too, have an unassailable moral, social and legal claim. Many have said that on being told to spruce up their areas they spent money buying a mobile stall, a cover for the stall and a curtain. They were told this as a condition of their continuing to sell then that condition was breached.
Some of the statements from the authorities at one level or another also suggest an intention to remove the fruit vendors.
All of this is wrong. Madame City Clerk, put your feet in the shoes of these vendors and see if you can walk!
3. Removing the vendors in the name of progress is a degraded and degrading view of progress
To return to Stella’s point that removing the vendors is to sacrifice culture for progress, something is wrong with how we understand progress. Progress is not about cutting down trees and clearing away people and their livelihoods so we can put asphalt and concrete that we can wash down easily. “I think the vending outside the market has for too long, hidden the beauty of the Stabroek Market and so we’re also likely to remove those structures around the market
