Vending zones soon in city

Ok - so, it's only a draft law after all, and the cabinet was appoiniting a sub-committee to look into it, unlike what's stated in the ToI report. Obviously, the ToI reporter has erred. Thanks Mahesh for pointing that out.

And yes, it's a contentious issue - to begin with, the definition of "legitimate street vendors" itself - and, will call for deep deliberations with all the stakeholders involved to arrive at some kind of a consensus. All the same, it needs to be pursued, and quite urgently too.

The Lok Sabha recently cleared the Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Bill, a piece of legislation with the aim of securing the rights and livelihood of small vendors in the country. With the count of small vendors estimated in tens of millions, the potential significance of such a law is clearly immense from the perspective of the huge, unorganized labour sector. But with the additional layers that it adds to the country’s already overburdened bureaucracy, there is little reason to be optimistic about the impact of the legislation.

- - - Serving the immediate consumption needs of middle and lower income class Indians, street vendors undoubtedly add a tremendous amount of value to the domestic economy. But to complicate matters, the issue of street vending has also brought forth the question of management of public space, with vendors often being perceived by governments as well as the common citizenry as free-riding on cramped public space. Thus, economically speaking, the task in the hands of local authorities is the management of a vital public good by balancing out economic efficiency against other pressing ends of public welfare.

Towards this end, the best idea coming from the minds of the architects of the current Bill is the building of an overarching bureaucratic apparatus. But as with bureaucratic restrictions of many kinds, the perverse incentives driving public authorities is likely to lead them to exploit citizens, poor vendors in this case, by erecting insurmountable rent-seeking barriers. The current legislation, thus, could further undermine the rights of small vendors instead of uplifting their status—which remains the Bill’s stated goal.

Also, the unintended consequences of the current legislation could be substantial as restrictions imposed by vending committees could stall the functioning of vibrant local markets that mainly serve the needs of poor households cut off from more expensive outlets in the supply chain. The way forward is to dedicate efforts towards minimizing the level of bureaucracy strangling activity at the local levels of the economy, while allowing local communities to deal with the constraints of space that accompany commerce by balancing the interests of various stakeholders.

For the full report in Livemint, click here.

I am not sure much has been achieved through the bill other than adding to the already long list of the government's vote claiming propaganda material, led by The Food Security Bill (check here for more on that). But, of course, a progressive government can use the law in positive ways too - will have to see how it evolves in future

• Those fighting for street vendors rights are not really putting pressure to implement supreme court rulings, only using the "don't vacate till" clause. it helps street vendors to carry on during this twilight period.
• The same  for " for vendors rights groups" are not doing anything internally within the street vendors community, to educate new vendors to abide by the street vending bill. This prohibits vending in some areas,residential streets being one of them. So in this twilight period the problem multiplies with every day new vendors coming into what would be against the spirit of the bill.

There is bad news for all street food lovers in the capital as Delhi government's notification for vendors has banned cooking on the roadside. Vendors' associations are planning to meet chief minister Arvind Kejriwal on Saturday to register their protest against the scheme for implementation of the Street Vendors Act, 2014.

The policy decision not only imposes a blanket ban on cooking but also has many stringent measures, which vendors claim could lead to more harassment for them.

The new scheme was notified on October 13 and civic agencies will have to implement it at the earliest, say government sources. - - - Ban on roadside cooking or in the open will have to be imposed as it is according to a Supreme Court order. We thoroughly studied the law before notifying the scheme," said a senior government official.

- - - - The Street Vendors (Protection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act, 2014, mandates that state governments frame a scheme for its implementation by municipal corporations under the direction of town vending committees.

- - - - As per the new scheme, vendors can't cook, can work only from sunrise to sunset, can't leave their goods at the vending site, no electricity and water connection will be provided, they can't make noise to grab customers' attention, they have to ensure that customers don't park their vehicles in front of their stalls, etc.

To ensure that there is no traffic problem due to vendors, the government has laid down stringent measures with fines ranging from Rs 250 to Rs 2,000 per day.

For the full text of the report (emphasis added by me) in the ToI, click here

One would have thought the vendors form a major vote bank of the AAP, and as such, the government (formed of the party) making such a move, can certainly be viewed as bold. One can say that they had no option considering the directive by the Supreme court. But, aren't we seeing enough cases of governments just not bothering with court directives? In that respect, this is certainly a refreshing approach, and the AAP government needs to be commended for it. Of course, one needs to see if they will carry it through, or succumb to all kinds of pressures that are invariably going to come on.

The report doesn't talk of forming of vendors zones, etc, as required under the Act. One hopes they have been provided - after all, there's the question of livelihoods too.