By Mark DaCosta- The People’s National Congress Reform / A Partnership for National Unity (PNCR/APNU) coalition has issued a call for rigorous planning, full transparency, and meaningful consultation ahead of the Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development’s ambitious municipal market rehabilitation programme, warning that without these safeguards, the initiative risks repeating the governing People’s Progressive Party Civic’s (PPP/C’s) history of poorly executed, over-budget projects that burden ordinary citizens.
The coalition’s position, made clear in a press statement released on July 17, 2026, centres on the fundamental principle that development must not become displacement — that any upgrade to our nation’s market infrastructure must prioritise the livelihoods, dignity, and economic survival of the vendors who depend upon these spaces daily.
The opposition coalition has expressed deep unease over what it describes as an “overly ambitious agenda of five sod turnings in two weeks,” cautioning that such haste threatens to replicate the PPP/C’s “failed track record of poorly executed and over cost projects that often lack adequate public input.” The PNCR/APNU coalition insists that the rule of law appears selectively applied by the governing party, noting that “the rule of law is never suitable to the PPPC except when it is in opposition.”
At the heart of the coalition’s critique lies the absence of critical project information. The PNCR/APNU coalition highlights that “projects have been announced without the publication of complete implementation schedules, final designs, contractor information, relocation plans, construction phases, or clear arrangements for maintaining access to markets during the works.” This information vacuum, the coalition argues, places vendors in a precarious position where they must confront “the possibility of lost income, reduced customer traffic, unsafe temporary conditions, or prolonged disruption” without adequate recourse or understanding of what lies ahead. The coalition firmly believes that “the public must not be expected to accept vague assurances while vendors face” such tangible threats to their economic wellbeing.
Drawing upon our country’s considerable oil revenues, the PNCR/APNU coalition contends that “expertise and benchmarking must never be lacking in any development initiative.” This resource advantage, the coalition emphasises, imposes a corresponding obligation to execute projects to international standards rather than settling for the substandard outcomes that have characterised too many previous endeavours. The coalition has therefore compiled a comprehensive list of disclosures that the Ministry must publish for each affected market before any rehabilitation works commence.
These include: “the approved scope and design of the project; the total project cost and source of funding; the name of the contractor and supervising authority; the commencement and completion dates; the construction and relocation phases; the number of vendors affected; the temporary accommodation plan; arrangements for sanitation, drainage, electricity, security and waste disposal; traffic, parking and customer-access arrangements; and the process for reporting breaches, delays and unsafe conditions.”
The PNCR/APNU coalition places particular emphasis upon the conditions of temporary accommodation, stating unequivocally that “every displaced vendor is provided with adequate temporary accommodation before construction affects his or her existing stall.” The coalition elaborates that such temporary spaces “must be safe, weather-resistant, properly lit, accessible to customers, supplied with water and sanitation facilities where required, and located so that vendors can continue to earn a livelihood.” Anything less, the coalition warns, cannot be considered acceptable. “A temporary arrangement that leaves vendors exposed to rain, heat, flooding, theft, poor sanitation or reduced customer access cannot be considered adequate,” the coalition declares.
Furthermore, the PNCR/APNU coalition demands that no vendor be displaced on the basis of informal commitments. The coalition insists that “each affected vendor should receive written information stating the temporary location assigned, the expected duration of displacement, the conditions governing the temporary space, and the arrangements for returning to the rehabilitated market.” This requirement for written documentation represents a crucial safeguard against the broken promises and administrative confusion that have plagued past initiatives.
The coalition also alerts vendors and market patrons to what it terms the “creep of inconvenience” — a gradual deterioration of conditions that transforms limited, manageable disruption into comprehensive hardship. The PNCR/APNU coalition describes this phenomenon as one “where an initially limited disruption expands into blocked entrances, shrinking vending space, reduced parking, dust, noise, unsafe walkways, drainage problems, delayed construction — [which are common problems] — and declining customer traffic.” Vendors are therefore encouraged to remain vigilant, to document conditions before construction begins, to maintain records of official commitments, to report hazards without delay, and to insist that agreed arrangements be honoured throughout the construction period.
The PNCR/APNU coalition further advocates for the inclusion of “vendor representatives in regular project planning and monitoring meetings,” alongside the public issuance of progress reports and immediate explanation of “any delay, variation in cost or alteration to the approved design.” The coalition’s overarching message is unmistakable: “Market rehabilitation must not become market displacement. Development should improve the circumstances of vendors and patrons, not transfer the burden of poor planning onto those who depend on the markets for their livelihoods and daily needs.”
Concluding its statement, the PNCR/APNU coalition urges the Ministry to abandon “fragmented announcements” in favour of “a transparent and comprehensive implementation framework,” insisting that “proper consultation must take place before — not after — decisions are made.” The coalition pledges continued vigilance, affirming that “the public will judge these projects by whether the markets are completed on time, within budget, to an acceptable international standard, and without causing unnecessary hardship to vendors and customers.”
