Less talk, more action on vendors
There is a strong sense of bothersome dejavu that comes with reading about a recent meeting involving government and other stakeholders that resolved to remove vendors trading illegally in various streets in the country.
For reasons that range from orderliness, tidiness to enhancement of city security, the relevant authorities have met several times in the past to discuss the removal vendors from streets and some years ago they were successfully chased off the streets despite strong resistance from the traders.
For a few months, street anarchy was replaced by order as city roads were clear and passable; but it wasn’t long before merchandise crept back onto the streets. Shoes, kitchenware and foodstuffs are all over the place—in some cases turning two-lane roads into one-lane passages as a remarkable fraction of the roads have audaciously been turned into display zones for various commodities.
Today, the cities that had briefly turned clean are once again clattered, noisy and insecure and one cannot help wondering where the authorities are when the “no street vending” model has literally been thrown to the dogs at the expense of street sanity for which city officials are paid to guard.
What is clear is that over time, the guardianship has been reduced to meetings that yield meaningless ultimatums and a few cases of running battles between the vendors and authorities, only to have the vendors trek back to the streets after some hours.
But it is not enough to sit in meetings or stand on podiums to preach or argue that vendors must leave the streets because that statement is stale, just like the reasons for relocating them to the designated places.
What we have witnessed so far is too much talk about change with very little action to match the talk. For how long are we going to have vendors insisting on plying their trade on the streets with impunity while authorities meet, meet and meet, before making empty promises to the public?
It is about time strategists behind all this talk went beyond mere gatherings and empty speeches, and moved on to facilitating the long-awaited visible changes that can transform towns and cities.
What has government and the other concerned stakeholders, for instance, done about vendors’ concerns about inadequate space in the government-designated markets, which apparently results in poor hygiene conditions?
Of what use is a meeting that resolves to send vendors to congested market places, when it is a given that such a move will yield justifiable non-compliance from the traders?
The argument for clean and secure streets is unquestionable as it offers Malawians a breath of fresh air, but it can only materialise if stakeholders put some effort in meaningful actions that correspond with their words.
Otherwise, it will take more than the current cosmetic statements and threats before the public can trust city authorities to resolve the vendor issue once and for all.
