Sari-sari stores are as Pinoy as the jeepney. These neighborhood stores proliferate because most Filipinos, who earn their income on a daily, if not weekly basis, live from day to day, going to the neighborhood store to buy only what they need for a day or two. Sometimes, even those who are better off find these sari-sari stores useful for their immediate needs, like on those times they suddenly run out of soy sauce while preparing lunch. Sari-sari stores are clearly the third world’s version of the convenience store. But the Filipinos take it further. There are also mobile markets, ambulant peddlers of fresh produce, who go on foot from house to house (although some use bicycles with sidecars). I know some who have been doing this for years that they now have their respective suki (loyal patrons). This set up is mutually beneficial for the peddlers who are earning a living and for the buyers who have fresh produce delivered to their doorstep.

Now comes this news that the local government will soon prohibit such kind of trade. The mayor himself made this announcement at a gathering of NGO and private sector representatives about a month ago. Doesn’t this move curtail the freedom of enterprise? The reason given was that these ambulant vendors should sell their goods in the public market. Obviously, this is a move to encourage (or could it be “to force?”) people (both vendors and buyers) to transact business at the new public market. Apparently, the volume of public market business transactions has not improved since the market was transferred to the new site. This, I was told by a tenant in the new market who maintains a store there.

As I write this, I still don’t know if an ordinance has been crafted to implement this or if the LGU will push through with this plan. I continue to see ambulant vendors plying their trade, some pass nonchalantly by the municipal hall. The government should leave these vendors alone. If the government thinks it is losing revenue because these vendors don’t pay fees like the vendors in the public market do, then the LGU should just levy the appropriate tax, which, according to the Local Revenue Code, should not be “in restraint of trade.” These people have families to support and they really don’t earn a fortune from their trade, just enough to amortize their small capital and put food on their table.

Filed under: Economics, Local scene, March 2007, My town | You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.