IN my column last week, I opined that this country has gradually slipped into a pernicious culture of lawlessness. I advocated for a sustained and even-handed crusade of enforcement of laws relating to public order despite the societal status of the offender.
I reaffirm that no serious plan to rid the nation of this scourge can cherry pick, even in the slightest, where and to whom the law is applied. I would therefore stand in opposition to any enforcement officer who skips over one, let alone hundreds of violators to arrive at a specific person or entity to do enforcement work.
In the same way, I do not support piecemeal application of the law only in certain communities, wards, or districts. I am an advocate for a comprehensive overhaul of the legislative framework to address, as far as possible, the nuances involved in the modern public order and social relations. I do believe that based on statements made by AG Nandlall, that some comprehensive legislative upgrades are in process. This must be accompanied by comprehensive public-policy prescriptions for reform of public order. Perhaps, also, a dedicated agency or ministerial unit should be tasked with the holistic implementation in restoration of public order. Any piecemeal or uneven application will fail.
One very ubiquitous lawless practice in Guyana is our romanticism with a hill of builder’s white sand on the parapets. Regardless of the size and scale of our construction project, it is customary to order a large truck load of sand, dump it on the parapets, have it spill over onto the roadway, and we just carry on with our daily lives and leave it there for weeks unending. Then at our own pace and pleasure, we utilise only a portion of it and simply leave the remainder for years. The grass does its thing, takes over, and that segment of the parapet becomes inaccessible. This has to stop.
Guyana stands alone in the world with this kind of lawlessness. I see business opportunity for sand traders to install duty-free sand-bagging facilities and packaged sand in various quantities, probably from as little as 50 pounds to as much as a tonne. People can go to their friendly hardware store and purchase sand in just the same way that they purchase cement.
Alternatively, government may want to allocate lands near major population centres to be used as sand depots where builders can go to buy just the amount of sand they need to use or just the amount that can be deposited on their property without encumbering the parapet. Of course, nothing prevents builders from procuring multiple truckloads of sand, as long as it can fit on their private property. That said, government cannot simply wake up one day and enforce the removal of builder’s sand from the roadway without the accompanying commonsensical provisions for alternative behaviour. This culture has been allowed to fester for far too long.
Wanton pavement vending should also be treated similarly; make alternative accommodation along with other forms of social intervention then take a no-nonsense approach to curb the pervasive practice.
Let me hasten to say, I am not against pavement vending, in and of itself, I am in stern opposition to unregulated, unorganised vending. I have travelled to quite a few countries, and I saw pavement vending in every single country I visited, in Europe, Africa, Asia, North America and just about every country in CARICOM, but none as disorganised and willy-nilly as it manifests in Guyana.
My last column drew a friendly lambaste from Freddie Kissoon in his column the following day. Part of his argument is that I missed several nuances. Freddie made some valid points. I take his criticism of Banks DIH that the company is being hypocritical when it took legal action to remove encumbrances outside its property in one location, but continues to encumber a larger swathe of public parapet outside its own property in another location. I believe Banks DIH is wrong but should not be singled out for special enforcement activity. The answer lies in Corporate Social Responsibility. Banks ought to have a corporate social conscience and no amount of enforcement activities can cure that.
I however have revolting sentiments towards a concept Freddie seems to be advocating. We should be wary of, and probably not attempt uniform application of the law because we perceive that there are untouchables in society who will get away with flouting the law.
If we are to go by that theory, then “let the poor vendors do their thing because the privileged will resist” and the application of the law will be skewed against the poor. An endless cycle of inaction. We cannot fail to implement even-handed public-policy measures because we believe or anticipate that some wealthy violators will resist, it’s too Animal-Farmish.
There is almost nothing in this society that cannot be cured if it is given the requisite dosages of political will.
To end this piece, I want to call attention to the immediate vicinity around the iconic historical Parliament Building, the seat of law making in Guyana. It is the most egregious example of the breakdown of public order in all of Guyana. The area is begging for an overhaul, begging for public order, and begging for public-policy officials with the scrotumic fortitude and vision to arrest.
In a previous column, I had advocated for the government to take in the former GNCB banking headquarters, Ministry of Social Protection, old fire service headquarters, transport stelling, Donkey City and the Stabroek Square to receive a major upgrade. There is enough space to accommodate all the current vendors, parking, transportation hub, modern boat landing, and a boardwalk in an ultra-modern design fit for a forward-looking oil economy.