Reasons why the Parking Meters Project should be rejected

The controversial parking meter project is once again in the spotlight, as the report on that issue done by the Commission of Inquiry appointed by the Mayor and City Council (M&CC) had been published. The M&CC is now expected to deliberate on the content of the report, and make a decision on the way forward based on the various options provided by the Committee, taking into account its contractual obligations and so on. So far, the M&CC seems to be shying away from tackling the issue frontally, as it has further delayed any decision on the project until sometime this month, when the matter will come up for discussion again.

The parking meter project attracted much controversy when it was officially rolled out in January 2017. Due to the several concerns regarding the contract and the actual implementation of the project itself, citizens, led by the Movement Against Parking Meters, formed large protests, demanding that the contract be rescinded. These sustained protests resulted in Communities Minister Ronald Bulkan ordering that the paid parking initiative be suspended and a committee be formed to have the contract revised.
The Committee held several consultations with individuals and various stakeholder groups, and even though the sessions were poorly attended, it was clear that majority of persons were against the project and favour a complete termination of the contract. It should be mentioned that the report laid out five or six options, ranging from rejection to acceptance of the parking meter project; but the Commission, on its part, did not recommend any position.
The Guyana Consumers Association (GCA), which speaks on behalf of all consumers, had from the inception pointed out that there is no social or economic justification for such a project to be imposed on the City, and had called for the contract to be revised or scrapped altogether. On this basis, the GCA had listed several valid reasons why the project in its present form should be rejected; these include:
(1) Smart City Solutions (SCS) had refused to disclose any financial information, including investment, except the Commission took an oath of non-disclosure of such information. This refusal to provide any financial and accounting information by SCS hindered the work of the Commission, and went counter to the Government of Guyana’s policy on transparency.
(2) In the Contract between SCS and M&CC, SCS was allotted 80% of the returns and M&CC 20%. SCS would notionally have made an investment of US$10M, while the City Council’s investment would have been the road system of Georgetown, worth many billions of dollars, plus the cost of the continuous maintaining of the roads over the next 20 years of the Contract. In other words, SCS would have invested less than 1% of the cost of the Scheme but would have been collecting 80% of the revenues! Such a giveaway of public funds is unacceptable.
(3) The owners of the Parking Meter Scheme would have been harvesting hundreds of millions of dollars per year, which would be sent abroad, causing a constant drain of the foreign exchange on the country. Such a net foreign exchange drain would lead to a weakening of the Guyana currency, resulting in increases in prices of goods and services.
(4) The Parking Meter Scheme would have caused businesses great losses. Their customer parking would have been eliminated, and the acceptance and delivery of goods at their premises would have become more expensive and time-consuming. Any contraction of business could result in unemployment and increase in prices of some consumer goods. The business community were therefore against the Scheme.
(5) Business in Georgetown would have further dried up, since business people and folk from the countryside who usually came to the City to shop and participate in entertainment activities would find it too expensive to do so, and would no longer come.
Finally, we agree with the GCA that the overwhelming majority of the population of Georgetown, as well as the tens of thousands who visit the City every day for business or pleasure, are against parking meters. This is good enough reason for the project to be scrapped. The M&CC should therefore proceed in making the tough decisions, and do what is necessary to relieve us of this monster which no doubt would add more stress to an already burdened population.