City Council responds to criticism of its “name and shame” campaign

Oct 26, 2015 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
The Council noted the comments of the Guyana Human Rights Association and other concerned citizens relating to name and shame section of the City Restoration Project.
It is imperative that the work of the Council be placed in its correct context. The Georgetown Municipality has commenced a restoration project; which has several components. The first phase includes; cleaning and desilting of drains and canals, cleaning of alleyways, restoring of playground and parks, tree trimming and addressing the wanton disposal of garbage andthe establishment of a citizen’s volunteer group.
The Council is employing its resources and man power to help return the pristine state of its capitol, so that citizens can enjoy an environment that is clean, green and beautiful. Cleaning the city requires money, manpower and equipment. The Council would have expended approximately (75) seventy five million in cleaning the Lacytown area. This figure would have been much more had it not been for contributions of the volunteer groups.
It is obvious that with all the cleanup efforts and information in the public domain some persons have not grasped the wider vision and are still to embrace the paradigm shift.
We note the suggestion of Marissa Lowden to implement community service; however, based on previous experiences, one single method of discouraging littering is not plausible because of the pervasiveness of the situation. This is why the Council is utilizing a multifaceted approach to bring awareness and to help change the negative environmental attitude of some. The school environmental awareness sessions, community outreaches, the Weekly Mayor Broadcast, public services announcements, provision of refuse receptacles, the Green Expo and conference  are some of the approaches that are employed by the Council in this phase of the project.
The work of the Council to address incorrect disposal is legitimized by the the Scavenging and Cleansing By Laws of the Municipal and District Council Act 28:01,Public Health Ordinance  and The Anti-litterRegulations of 2013.
The Scavenging and Cleansing By laws addresses the need for refuse receptacles on premise, the type and size of refuse receptacle required. The Public Health Ordinance focuses on the work of the local authority in provision of removal services and responsibility of citizens; Part IX , section 115– (1)of The Public Health Ordinance states that”no dead animal, offal, swill, brine, garbage  or other offence matter shall be thrown or placed or allowed to flow or fall on any street, footway, dam or other public place, or in any river, creek, trench drain, pool or water course”.
The anti-litter regulations of 2013 outline several offences and penalties and provide for Litter Wardens with authority to enforce these Regulations and with special powers of court on convicting offenders. Under ‘offences’, “A person who, without reasonable excuse, deposits litter in or on any public place… is guilty of an offence”. Also, persons who deposit litter from a moving vehicle unto a public place will be considered an offender.”
“If the person who committed the offence cannot be determined, then the driver of the vehicle will be held responsible.”  The regulation specifically addresses the provision of refuse receptacles in vehicles and states that “the owner of every vehicle for hire provides within his/her vehicle, a receptacle for the collection of litter”. It is important to note that under these regulations, the City Constabulary Officers can bring charges against offenders.
The Environmental Protection Agency Act allows the local authority to arrest, charge and make public the names of persons who pollute the environment. The Environmental Protection Act states that a “local authority or litter prevention warden , within the object of promoting the abatement of litter may take such steps as the authority thinks appropriate for making known to the public in its area the effects of the provision of these regulations”.
Guyana Human Rights Association does not quite understand the depth of the culture of littering that pervaded this society. It is timely that a classic incident be highlighted to give a clear picture of the depth of unruliness that is evident. During the Course of the week as workers toiled assiduously to clean a specific alleyway in the upper Bourda area, a bag of garbage was thrown into the alley way by a resident. The contractor tried to caution that person in a very polite manner but was greeted with a litany of expletives; this is the reality in which we operate were some persons believe that they have a right to litter.
The truism is everyone has a right to live in a healthy environment. Therefore, no one should seek to endanger the life of another by poor environment health practices.  Poor environmental health practices can undermine human rights. Approximately ten years ago the Council had installed street bins in strategic location in the City. It was appalling to watch those bins being vandalized and abused. Even with the presence of street bins people still littered the streets and alleyways, even with bins close by. However, in spite of the challenges the new administration would not be deterred, the restoration process must continue which involve the provision of street bins and yard bins. Also, stern measures will be taken against the recalcitrant. The Council therefore urges every Guyanese regardless of age, ethnicity or gender to co-operate with the City Council as we work to restore the beauty the City. The Council believes that every citizen has a right to live in a City that is clean; therefore, the mission of the Georgetown City Council is to provide that clean environment.
Debra Lewis
Public Relation officer (ag) M&CC

---

---