Participatory Planning (4)

In most of the consultation process, we always forget about the existence of third parties or other stakeholders. For example, in the recent dispute between the legitimate hawkers with the hawkers without license at the morning market of SS2. The hawkers objected to the appeal by hawkers without license to issue them the permit for trading there as they feared of competition and other consequences on traffic and cleanliness problems. The hawkers without license appealed for permit as they have been there more than 10 years and are contributing towards the prosperity of the market. They have also argued that they are law abiding citizens.
Both, however agreed that economic situation now is directly impacting their business. Both sides looked for support to further their argument. Nobody has actually consulted other stakeholders such as the residents, the shop owners and the market patrons over this dispute.

We have not asked the residents and shop owners, whom have their presence there days and nights to live with whatever odours, if any, and rats, if any, and disease, if any there. They are the groups there exposing their life, their living, their families and their health, and not the hawkers as hardly any of them are the local SS2 residents. Shop owners, while paying high rental have to compete with hawkers for car parking space, the customers and even the right to go in and out from the area. Logically, these groups should be consulted and by right their views are much more important, isn't it? They are our pay master as MBPJ is collecting tax from the residents and shop owners, thus our target for services provision.

Perhaps consulting these groups might provide us, the planners better insight and options. Perhaps their input will bring in wider perspective on an integrated urban development. Perhaps we can be wiser in making a choice after listening them out rather than trying to please the two parties who have their interest come first.