VENDORS at the Stabroek Market Square were, last Thursday, invited to City Hall for a meeting with members of the City Council and administration. They were then informed of an obviously well-intentioned clean-up exercise that would necessitate their temporary (i.e. four months) relocation to an area south of Public Buildings, until a permanent location is found for them to ply their trade.Vendors were expected to clear the Stabroek Market Square of their wares by 3:30 a.m. yesterday, to facilitate commencement of this clean-up exercise, which began at 7:00 a.m. Along with this directive, the Town Clerk informed that those who failed to register at City Hall and participate in the exercise would not be permitted to sell at any time.

In presence of the media, the Town Clerk and Deputy Mayor made known several reasons that prompted the removal decision; some of these reasons are: the perpetration of illegal activities, the presence of limers and loiterers, irresponsible garbage disposal, restoration of the area, and preparation for national independence celebration.

The vendors expressed reservations about their removal, citing their apprehension that any removal would be permanent. They also cited security considerations; the potential of loss of income through relocation; their not being previously consulted by City Hall on the proposal; and their feeling of betrayal and being used.

The Town Clerk then made it known that the vendors had been invited for consultation, which for him meant telling them what was planned for them, their role in the process, and how he felt about issues.

The next day, the vendors took their grievances by way of protest action, first to the Ministry of the Presidency, to speak with President Granger; and having not achieved an audience there, they walked to City Hall, placards in hands, vocalising their views on the entire affair.

For some reason, it is being felt by City Hall — though that agency is not unique in this behaviour — that doing the same thing over and over can derive different results. Only a few months ago, vendors on the Bourda Mall had a similar experience with City Hall, and they reacted in like manner as their Stabroek counterparts.

The desire to restore Georgetown, and all Guyana, to an environmentally pleasing place, where law and order are held in esteem, is the aspiration of Guyanese. In pursuance thereof, where it requires the involvement of people, one way or the other, this has to be done with some degree of civility and respect for others. This is where City Hall keeps getting into trouble, raising the ire of citizens and vendors, both of whom are needed, given that their presence makes the place a community and their revenues are needed for the functioning of the municipal authority.

Where people remain central to development, they should be treated with respect and dignity. The Council is not being faulted for its restoration projects, it is being supported and encouraged; but where little or no effort is being made to foster amicable and involved relationships with the community, businesses or residents, there will continue to be public protests.

The vendors had more than a mouthful to say. They expressed the view that they are pawns in a political game that is designed to serve the interest, not of the city, but of its personnel. This is not a pleasant place for the society to be in, moreso the political and administrative leadership, including the Town Clerk, whom the vendors consider had used them to undermine the previous Town Clerk, Carol Sooba.

Such perceptions, real or contrived, undermine the integrity of the office and holder in discharging duties consistent with the city’s by-laws. When persons are in service to others, elected or employed, the “I” pronoun is not determinant of actions or decisions. Those have to be determined by what is just, fair and ethical. Failure to regard these principles as important to getting the job done, or failure to understand one’s role in the structure, will undermine any and every effort to forge harmonious relationships and to foster growth and development.

Whether persons — due to homelessness, substance abuse or mental health — have made the streets their home, they are human beings with loved ones; and though they have fallen on hard times, they are deserving of the society’s compassion, and efforts should be made to rehabilitate and reintegrate them into society so they can enjoy their deserved respect and dignity. Derogatory name calling will not achieve this.

With the national call for a new political tone/culture, things have to be done differently if change is to come and development achieved.