Having problems with message search?
Assuming the Supreme Court passes an order regulating hawkers based on whatever criteria it deems fit in its wisdom, I still have some questions regarding hawkers and hawking zones. These pertain to doability and enforceability and fairness.
a) Currently, when hawkers are removed, they return to the same spot in a couple of days or earlier. How can this be prevented? It seems that almost permanent vigil is required. There will never be enough BMC staff / police to do so. Can and should and will the owners / occupiers of the area do so e.g. the LACGs?
Similarly, how do you prevent hawkers from occupying more space than they are supposed to. In fact, SC is likely to allow only 3' x 3' space. Is this enough space for a hawker to sit as well as display products?
b) There are more than 2.50 lakh hawkers in Mumbai. The SC order will enable 25 - 50,000 of them to hawk. What happens to the balance? What will they do? Is there any possibility of alternate work / employment? Do we really expect them to pack their bags and leave Mumbai?
c) Since number of applicants will exceed the number of hawking spaces, how will this be regulated? If by lottery whereby spaces are alloted for one year, what happens to the person who gets hawking rights one year and not the next year? How will he / she survive? What does one expect them to do?
Also, is it fair to equate someone hawking since over a decade with someone newly hawking.
Also, what about caste-based quota systems? Wouldn't they be applicable here?
If, on the other hand, space is alloted on a highest bidder basis, then one of the tenets supporting hawking i.e. as a tool for urban poverty alleviation goes away. Also if a hawker has to pay a lot to get space, then the price of the products goes up, and this spoils another tenet viz. cheap prices.
d) Once a hawker knows that his space is guaranteed and competition is also reduced, he will jack up prices because he knows he is selling convenience now to the consumer. He no longer has to compete on cost. The same reason why coolies charge more than they are supposed to. The same reason why shops near popular tourist spots overcharge.
e) Hawkers are present in two types of places -- natural markets e.g. near railway stations; and created markets e.g. Fashion Street. The SC guidelines greatly reduce hawking in natural markets e.g. railway stations, educational, medical, and religious institutions, and municipal or private markets. So the classic clash between the buyer of the product or service (i.e. pro-hawker consumers) versus non-buyer users (e.g. anti-hawker pedestrians) goes in favour of the latter. But the former are the cause why hawking exists in the first place.
So if hawking zones are to be those where the markets are not natural, but created, then the social and philosophical dimension towards hawking changes. These are now basically low-cost shops with very low overheads and thus able to sell things cheaply. In that case, would it not be fair to reduce the administrative and financial burdens on shops and eating places which come under the Shops and Establishment Act. They do provide employment and thus help in urban poverty alleviation too and in a more 'proper' way.
f) If hawkers are allowed in particular areas for certain periods of time only e.g. food hawkers in commercial areas during lunch time - 1 to 3 pm; or outside schools and colleges in non-study hours e.g. 6 to 10 pm, I have two questions. One, what will they do during other times esp. the lunch hour ones. Secondly, who will ensure that they do not ply their trade beyond these timings?
g) Who really wants hawkers? The temporary visitors want them but not the permanent residents in an area. So if hawkers are allowed in every garden or recreation ground, the visitors there may like it, but not the residents nearby. Whose interests should be taken into account?
h) Certain food-related hawkers invite a lot of vehicular traffic e.g. those selling paan, juice, eatables especially at night. This is partly because they provide a place to hang out for some time. Shouldn't these be allowed stand-alone areas instead of being forced into a hawking zone? If so, what should those norms be? Suppose they are allowed in private places e.g. in a restaurant's area or a CHS compound, should they be paying anything to BMC?
i) Since mobile hawkers may not be restricted at all i.e. vegetable sellers carrying their ware on their heads or in push-carts, they will have to announce their presence / attract customers by shouting, ringing a bell, etc. Would this not create more nuisance and be less buyer-friendly than if these were hawking in known areas nearby e.g. to buy standard fresh foodstuff every morning?
j) So hawking zone is one concept i.e. on a long broad road. But should other possibilities be considered e.g. single stalls; a limited number of stalls; gathering of a restricted group of hawkers at a particular area during specified time periods selling certain category of goods. Maybe these other options could be in consultation / approval of local owner / occupiers i.e. LACGs?
I am quite curious to know your suggestions and viewpoints. While some could consider it a 'classroom' or 'academic' exercise, I am quite convinced that laws fail because they are not practical to enforce or are sometimes not socially fair or practical or doable.
Regards,
Vinay
Send Email