'It's a shocking idea': outcry over Bangkok street vendor ban

[rooster59]

'It's a shocking idea': outcry over Bangkok street vendor ban

Hannah Ellis-Petersen

 

Tourists walk past street vendors on Khaosan Road. Photograph: Panu Wongcha-Um/Reuters

 

Tourists and stallholders say city’s attempt to sanitise the bustling, chaotic Khaosan Road is stripping the area of its charm

 

Few streets evoke the chaos of Bangkok like the Khaosan Road, a place of pilgrimage for tanned, dreadlocked, tassle-adorned backpackers for decades.

 

Yet this week, in an attempt to impose some order on the capital’s famed tourist road, the Thai authorities ordered all street vendors selling food, clothes and trinkets to clear off the pavements during the day.

 

The edict caused an outcry from locals and tourists alike. The Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA), a form of city police, has been accused of trying to sanitise the atmosphere that makes this stretch such a draw for millions each year – and at the expense of the street’s 200 vendors, who already have meagre earnings.

 

Full story: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/aug/04/bangkok-street-vendor-ban-prompts-outcry-thailand

 

The Guardian: 2018-08-05

[scubascuba3]

They seem to be doing their best to ruin what people like about Thailand

[Samui Bodoh]

It seems clear that the government's vision for Bangkok is a low-rent shopping mall without the ambiance or class.

 

This is what happens when you do not allow people a vote; bureaucrats go "wild".

 

Stop this nonsense before Bangkok loses its remaining charm...

 

 

[lamyai3]

1 hour ago, rooster59 said:

Few streets evoke the chaos of Bangkok like the Khaosan Road, a place of pilgrimage for tanned, dreadlocked, tassle-adorned backpackers for decades.

 

Yet this week, in an attempt to impose some order on the capital’s famed tourist road, the Thai authorities ordered all street vendors selling food, clothes and trinkets to clear off the pavements during the day.

 

The edict caused an outcry from locals and tourists alike. The Bangkok Metropolitan Administration (BMA), a form of city police, has been accused of trying to sanitise the atmosphere that makes this stretch such a draw for millions each year – and at the expense of the street’s 200 vendors, who already have meagre earnings.

Indeed. The crackdown on street vendors citywide, Chinatown cleanup, the Mahakan Fort debacle, the flower market and now Khaosan... it's enough to pine for the old days where the BMA left things mostly alone and the worst you might expect was endemic corruption. 

[new2here]

I tend to believe in the principle of reasonable balance.  In that I don’t support the wholly (or mostly)  unregulated existence of markets or sellers that obstruct recognized public foot paths, block roads or other areas that may be used in emergencies.

 

In the same way, I also don’t agree with the wholesale, blanket prohibition of street sellers.. as I do think they can add some element of charm or personality to an area and may also serve as an income generation for a class of the population.

 

so.. I think the key is to find and be able to maintain the right balance between maintaining the free-flow of pedestrians on recognized, publicly funded footpaths, insuring proper emergency, safety and security access together with keeping an areas’ charm or character as well as keeping economic opportunities open for those in the lower ranks.

 

In the case of KSR, I think it really only needed a “tweak” or adjustment of how and where the sellers operate and not a wholesale removal - IMHO 

[CLW]

Good that it made in into the international news!

[sammieuk1]

Hope they will welcome the influx of ex traders begging for a living or has there been a welfare system covertly introduced.?

[TravelerEastWest]

The cleanup is great news!

 

Long overdue.

[flyingtlger]

and Then, There Were None........

 

[ELVIS123456]

Great News. 

Business that pay to rent a shop/store, are extending themselves onto the streets with little/no control - and others just 'blow in'.

There are places everywhere in Thailand for markets - no exceptions should be allowed for tourist scammers. 

Get rid of them all - and then organise and manage what (if any) vendors are allowed back, and when and where.

The current free for all (but pay a local Cop/Govt) is a joke and needs to be closed down.

 

 

 

[zyxwv]

I agree with Elvis. My first contact with Khaosan was one of wonder. It was 1988 and the place was different. The street vendors came out at night but ONLY on the sidewalks. The bone of contention at the time was that they could NOT set up during the day, when storefronts wanted people to walk past.

That is reasonable don't you think.

then during the nights there came a time when the storeowners wanted you to ask permission to set up in front of the store (and even made you pay a fee)

Now the entire street is filled with vendors at night . It is hard to walk. The storeowners put up their own stalls in front of their places or no one even sees the entrance to their shop. That doesn't seem fair that customers can't even see the shop , which people pay rent for.

All in all, Elvis has stated a very good solution.

[zyxwv]

can you imagine Khaosan on a sunny day. ????

[jimmyyy]

Be nice to walk on the sidewalk.   Actually be able to see the store fronts.  Vendors make it look trashy IMO.

[Classic Ray]

1 hour ago, new2here said:

I tend to believe in the principle of reasonable balance.  In that I don’t support the wholly (or mostly)  unregulated existence of markets or sellers that obstruct recognized public foot paths, block roads or other areas that may be used in emergencies.

 

In the same way, I also don’t agree with the wholesale, blanket prohibition of street sellers.. as I do think they can add some element of charm or personality to an area and may also serve as an income generation for a class of the population.

 

so.. I think the key is to find and be able to maintain the right balance between maintaining the free-flow of pedestrians on recognized, publicly funded footpaths, insuring proper emergency, safety and security access together with keeping an areas’ charm or character as well as keeping economic opportunities open for those in the lower ranks.

 

In the case of KSR, I think it really only needed a “tweak” or adjustment of how and where the sellers operate and not a wholesale removal - IMHO 

In my soi near Udom Suk BTS, the BMA (I presume) has painted white boundary lines on the footpath, leaving adequate pedestrian room, where food stalls can set up six days a week, Monday being a day off for the traders and an opportunity for thorough cleaning by the BMA. There is no road obstruction and a useful service is provided. Can’t a similar system be set up everywhere?

[new2here]

In my soi near Udom Suk BTS, the BMA (I presume) has painted white boundary lines on the footpath, leaving adequate pedestrian room, where food stalls can set up six days a week, Monday being a day off for the traders and an opportunity for thorough cleaning by the BMA. There is no road obstruction and a useful service is provided. Can’t a similar system be set up everywhere?

While I haven’t seen that area you speak to, it sounds as if that’s a doable and reasonable compromise. I’m not against them, but do think there needs some measure of control, enforcement of rule (ie proper taxes and VAT collected and paid), insuring that the free right of pedestrian movement on public footpaths etc are not materially impacted ...

[473geo]

A rising supply of air conditioned Malls with plenty of walking space shop front viewing, restaurants and cheap food in an air conditioned environment.

 

Street markets, with the atmosphere,hustle and bustle, bursting with the spirit of free enterprise, and food on the hoof

 

So let people vote with their feet, if there were a shortage of patrons at the street markets surely they would fade away, likewise the malls....... no 'cleansing' required

 

Quite easy not to visit places one finds objectionable

 

 

 

 

 

[Faikham]

3 hours ago, new2here said:

I tend to believe in the principle of reasonable balance.  In that I don’t support the wholly (or mostly)  unregulated existence of markets or sellers that obstruct recognized public foot paths, block roads or other areas that may be used in emergencies.

 

In the same way, I also don’t agree with the wholesale, blanket prohibition of street sellers.. as I do think they can add some element of charm or personality to an area and may also serve as an income generation for a class of the population.

 

so.. I think the key is to find and be able to maintain the right balance between maintaining the free-flow of pedestrians on recognized, publicly funded footpaths, insuring proper emergency, safety and security access together with keeping an areas’ charm or character as well as keeping economic opportunities open for those in the lower ranks.

 

In the case of KSR, I think it really only needed a “tweak” or adjustment of how and where the sellers operate and not a wholesale removal - IMHO 

 

This is so obviously the right answer, it befuddles me that we seem to be considering only two option:

 

No vendors

Unregulated vendors

 

I broadly like and support street vendors, but think it would be very easy to require them to leave adequate space for people to walk, treat people on the sidewalk reasonably well, clean up after themselves, not sue the sewer system as their garbage cans, etc.

[Thingamabob]

Excellent news.

[khunken]

2 hours ago, Classic Ray said:

In my soi near Udom Suk BTS, the BMA (I presume) has painted white boundary lines on the footpath, leaving adequate pedestrian room, where food stalls can set up six days a week, Monday being a day off for the traders and an opportunity for thorough cleaning by the BMA. There is no road obstruction and a useful service is provided. Can’t a similar system be set up everywhere?

Yes it could.

In my area they've done the same with the stretch of On Nut between Big C & Sukhumvit. The stretch between the klong and Soi Pridi (Pra Kanong) has also been turned into a walkable footpath by restricting the vendors to the shop side of the pavement only.

As someone who enjoys buying items - especially fruit - from the vendors as well as being able to walk on the footpath, both can be catered for.

[new2here]

 
This is so obviously the right answer, it befuddles me that we seem to be considering only two option:
 
No vendors
Unregulated vendors
 
I broadly like and support street vendors, but think it would be very easy to require them to leave adequate space for people to walk, treat people on the sidewalk reasonably well, clean up after themselves, not sue the sewer system as their garbage cans, etc.

I think the reason that the solutions presented are largely “all” or “none” types is that, this is how sudden, reactive responses tend to go BEFORE they have the time/opportunity to be better thought out, more input gained and a decent amount of trialing completed... kind of the proverbial “knee-jerk” reaction if you will ... but I think if given the right amount of time and if involving the right people, I’ll bet a good win-win can be found.

For this reason, I tend to dislike the ever-so-famous Thai “crackdown” on this or that issue.... as they are rarely ever long lasting, don’t really provide for a meaningful long-term fix that all sides can agree with and usually only work when the immediate risk/fear of enforcement action is present.



Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Faikham]

18 minutes ago, new2here said:

 

I think the reason that the solutions presented are largely “all” or “none” types is that, this is how sudden, reactive responses tend to go BEFORE they have the time/opportunity to be better thought out, more input gained and a decent amount of trialing completed... kind of the proverbial “knee-jerk” reaction if you will ... but I think if given the right amount of time and if involving the right people, I’ll bet a good win-win can be found.

For this reason, I tend to dislike the ever-so-famous Thai “crackdown” on this or that issue.... as they are rarely ever long lasting, don’t really provide for a meaningful long-term fix that all sides can agree with and usually only work when the immediate risk/fear of enforcement action is present.



Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

I just wish some association of vendors would come out and say let's make a deal: We can sell things in the street if we take the concerns of critics and those impacted by our business seriously.

 

Maybe create one of those BMA program a "Non-annoying vendor" certificate or something. The clean vendor programs in the past seemed to work. But I think Thais care more about clean food than all the other issues.

[NoshowJones]

5 hours ago, new2here said:

 

While I haven’t seen that area you speak to, it sounds as if that’s a doable and reasonable compromise. I’m not against them, but do think there needs some measure of control, enforcement of rule (ie proper taxes and VAT collected and paid), insuring that the free right of pedestrian movement on public footpaths etc are not materially impacted ...

 

"(ie taxes and VAT collected and paid)", How can that work? I would think that the majority of these vendors don't make enough profit to be able to pay taxes and VAT. I would expect to be able to make enough profit to provide for myself and family before telling any authority the truth of my earnings.

[ChiangMaiLightning2143]

Sidewalks (pavements) are for walking. Streets are for cars. The vendors should be shunted to hawker centers like Singapore, or they can rent space in a mall. Ban the street stall food completely it attracts vermins.

[NoshowJones]

4 hours ago, khunken said:

Yes it could.

In my area they've done the same with the stretch of On Nut between Big C & Sukhumvit. The stretch between the klong and Soi Pridi (Pra Kanong) has also been turned into a walkable footpath by restricting the vendors to the shop side of the pavement only.

As someone who enjoys buying items - especially fruit - from the vendors as well as being able to walk on the footpath, both can be catered for.

The problems start when the pedestrians are forced on to the road to get past because of the selfishness of some vendors.

[White Christmas13]

11 hours ago, scubascuba3 said:

They seem to be doing their best to ruin what people like about Thailand

I always thought people liked the temples and girls

 

[observer90210]

why harass and persecute the poor tying to make a decent living ? ....start to crackdown on the taxi cheats in Thailand who refuse the meter and cheat customers daily.....but sorry, the taxi/tuk tuk mafia in Thailand,  seems to be well protected by god knows who...

[KhunFred]

6 hours ago, Classic Ray said:

In my soi near Udom Suk BTS, the BMA (I presume) has painted white boundary lines on the footpath, leaving adequate pedestrian room, where food stalls can set up six days a week, Monday being a day off for the traders and an opportunity for thorough cleaning by the BMA. There is no road obstruction and a useful service is provided. Can’t a similar system be set up everywhere?

Many wealthy Thais want modernity at any price. They don't have to worry about scratching out a living selling food or trinkets. They want first world status with no first world safety net.

[scubascuba3]

I always thought people liked the temples and girls
 

Girls yes, street food yes, culture yes, temples only for tourists

[overherebc]

5 hours ago, Faikham said:

 

This is so obviously the right answer, it befuddles me that we seem to be considering only two option:

 

No vendors

Unregulated vendors

 

I broadly like and support street vendors, but think it would be very easy to require them to leave adequate space for people to walk, treat people on the sidewalk reasonably well, clean up after themselves, not sue the sewer system as their garbage cans, etc.

And do it in such a way emergency services can get through where and when needed.

[over2you]

9 hours ago, new2here said:

I tend to believe in the principle of reasonable balance.  In that I don’t support the wholly (or mostly)  unregulated existence of markets or sellers that obstruct recognized public foot paths, block roads or other areas that may be used in emergencies.

 

In the same way, I also don’t agree with the wholesale, blanket prohibition of street sellers.. as I do think they can add some element of charm or personality to an area and may also serve as an income generation for a class of the population.

 

so.. I think the key is to find and be able to maintain the right balance between maintaining the free-flow of pedestrians on recognized, publicly funded footpaths, insuring proper emergency, safety and security access together with keeping an areas’ charm or character as well as keeping economic opportunities open for those in the lower ranks.

 

In the case of KSR, I think it really only needed a “tweak” or adjustment of how and where the sellers operate and not a wholesale removal - IMHO 

A very interesting and intelligent opinion about the matter.

I very much support your opinions.

Sadly Thailand doesn't work like this. Or very rarely.

All parties concerned need to sit down and thrash it out properly before doing anything. Including street traders. Local business property owners. Ambulance and Fire Service. And POLICE.

I read something about the instigating department of the new rules/laws not consulting with the local Police beforehand about whether it was implementable or not.

T. I. T.