• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Gone: Illegal ice-cream vendors on Orchard Road

metalslug

Alfrescian
Loyal
New and sick laws!!


Gone: Illegal ice-cream vendors on Orchard Road
Remaining ones have licence to sell island-wide
March 25, 2009

NP_IMAGES_JHVENDOR-L72.jpg

LEGAL VENDOR: Outside Orchard MRT station, Mr Tan Ah Hock holds up his licence to sell ice-cream island-wide. TNP PICTURE: JOANNA HOR

IF YOU go to Orchard Road frequently, you may recall seeing several ice-cream vendors, especially along the stretch outside Wisma Atria and Ngee Ann City.

But the number has dropped significantly since late last month.

The National Environment Agency (NEA) said officers have warned some of them against selling ice-cream on Orchard Road.

As many as 10 have been stopped from operating there, Shin Min Daily News reported on Friday.

The reason is that their licence allows them to sell ice-cream only in the Tanjong Pagar area.

The ice-cream vendors, however, told the evening newspaper that they had been selling ice-cream on Orchard Road for five to six years before they were stopped about a month ago.

When The New Paper tried to contact them, they declined to be interviewed.

An ice-cream distributor, who declined to be named, told The New Paper that the vendors had resorted to operating at Orchard Road because business at Tanjong Pagar was very bad.

He said they had been chased away in past years too, but they would return to Orchard Road.

He said: 'They told me that all the other places in Tanjong Pagar where they can set up their stalls were already occupied by other ice-cream vendors.'

Since being warned this time, they have stopped their business for now, the ice-cream distributor said.

An NEA spokesman said vendors caught selling goods in areas where they are not licensed would be given verbal warnings.

If they persisted, they would be issued with up to three written warnings before their licence is suspended for two weeks.

As of this month, there are 350 vendors holding town council street hawking licences.

These licences permit them to sell ice-cream in a single constituency only.

The spokesman said that this was to prevent all the vendors from gathering at one location and causing 'public obstruction'.

The vendors who are licensed to sell ice-cream on Orchard Road possess an island-wide licence, which allows them to sell ice-cream anywhere in Singapore, the NEA spokesman said.

These were issued during a 'one-time licensing' exercise in 1974.

There are only 35 vendors who possess the island-wide licence now.

When The New Paper visited Orchard Road around 5pm on Friday, we saw five vendors along a 200m stretch outside Takashimaya and Wisma Atria.

All carried the island-wide licence.

Good friends

Three of the vendors said they have been selling ice-cream on Orchard Road for 10 years.

Mr Lee Keok Beng, 68, who mans a stall outside Takashimaya, said all five vendors were good friends who do not poach each other's customers.

And contrary to the belief that business on Orchard Road is the most profitable, all three griped that takings had fallen since the economic downturn.

The arrival of illegal vendors only made things worse.

Mr Lee said in Mandarin: 'With all these illegal vendors, our daily takings have been reduced by half.'

Another vendor, Mr Tan Ah Hock, 66, said in Mandarin: 'The economy is so bad now, people buy less ice-cream. So it's better for us that they (the illegal vendors) got chased away.'

Mr Tan said he used to earn $1,500 a month, but this had dropped to $1,200 because of the recession.

As The New Paper was speaking to him, two NEA officers came to check on his licence.

Pointing at them, he said: 'They come two or three times a day to check our licences.'

The NEA spokesman said they have not stepped up checks on licences on Orchard Road.

He said: 'It doesn't mean that we condone it when they are not caught (selling ice-cream in unlicensed areas).

'We will give them verbal warnings as much as possible. Most of them will comply. Warning letters will be used as the last resort.'

Joanna Hor and Audrey Tan, newsroom interns
 

metalslug

Alfrescian
Loyal
http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking+News/Singapore/Story/STIStory_353923.html

Hawkers leave Orchard
Business elsewhere can't support livelihood, say illegal ice cream vendors
By Melissa Sim & Lim Wei Chean

ST_IMAGES_WCHAWKER.jpg

Only hawkers with islandwide licences, like this vendor, are allowed on Orchard Road. At least 10 illegal vendors have left after warnings from the NEA. -- ST PHOTO: WANG HUI FEN

HAWKERS who do not hold the correct licence have been warned to take their business away from Orchard Road.

It is believed that at least 10 illegal ice cream vendors have left the shopping strip in the last month since they were slapped with orders to leave.

The only roadside hawkers allowed on Orchard Road are those who hold islandwide licences.

But such blanket licences were no longer issued after 1974, and only 35 are in circulation. They lapse when the licence holder dies.

The illegal ice cream sellers on Orchard Road typically hold licences which allow them to sell their sweet treats only in suburban housing estates.

The National Environment Agency (NEA) has also stepped up warnings against roadside pedlars hawking sundries from tissue paper to cheap wallets, belts, toys and handbags.

Their presence turns Singapore's premier shopping belt into a low-class 'pasar malam', or night bazaar, along with the buskers and ear-piercing road shows, the Orchard Road Business Association complained recently.

A Straits Times check on Monday found eight ice cream wagons along the 800m stretch between Orchard and Somerset MRT stations. Three did not have an islandwide licence.

But many told The Straits Times that business away from Orchard Road cannot support a livelihood.

Read the full story in today's edition of The Straits Times.
 

SIFU

Alfrescian
Loyal
in this case NEA officers did nothing wrong what??

they must be fair to those vendors with the valid licences rite.. imagine u stay hdb with valid season parking, then u cannot find parking lots becos cars from other places occupy the season parking lot, u happy meh??

we must bash cockup civil servants lah, but pls bash properly..
 

Cthulhu

Alfrescian
Loyal
Once again our govt is killing the spirit of enterprise, just like what the did to those breakfast vans. Considering the one time licensing happened 35 years ago and only a handful of people have the license, why not issue a few more?

The pasar malam argument is full of shit too. Remember the failed gluttons' square? Doesn't that have a pasar malm feel too? Go to the CBD / shopping district of other countries and you'll also see people selling hotdogs, pies, candy etc.

Shopping belts should be allowed to evolve their own unique identities. This is what gives it flavour and colour that locals and tourists like. Till now our govt still don't understand that their pre-planning always end in epic failures.

BTW, I wonder if those ice cream sellers that follow SAF troops have licenses ...
 

SIFU

Alfrescian
Loyal
if NEA dun control illegal ice-cream vendors in orchard rd, leaving only the legal ones, 1 day u will find PRC selling ice-cream in orchard rd..

is that what u want???:confused:
 

Cthulhu

Alfrescian
Loyal
The question here is not legal or illegal because bureaucracy is preventing people from even getting a license.

If PRCs want to sell street food so be it. I am a person who is very pro-free enterprise, especially at the individual level. As long as there is no safety hazard or nuisance to public, please carry on.
 

littlefish

Alfrescian
Loyal
The question here is not legal or illegal because bureaucracy is preventing people from even getting a license.

If PRCs want to sell street food so be it. I am a person who is very pro-free enterprise, especially at the individual level. As long as there is no safety hazard or nuisance to public, please carry on.

I think all street hawkers have to be licensed. Otherwise, if someone falls sick from eating some food, they will KPKB about government not doing their job. You also want to be sure that the food you eat is reasonably safe. This can't be left to the individual hawker and has to be controlled/monitored by a central government body. In the event that you get food poisoning, there also needs to be an agency that can conduct tests on the food to determine what kind of bacteria is on it.
 

Cthulhu

Alfrescian
Loyal
I think all street hawkers have to be licensed. Otherwise, if someone falls sick from eating some food, they will KPKB about government not doing their job. You also want to be sure that the food you eat is reasonably safe. This can't be left to the individual hawker and has to be controlled/monitored by a central government body. In the event that you get food poisoning, there also needs to be an agency that can conduct tests on the food to determine what kind of bacteria is on it.

You have given a good explanation on why licenses are needed and I agree with you. However, if you read the 1st post, the vendors who got chased out already have a license to sell ice cream. What they don't have is a license to sell at Orchard. Therefore, the problem is bureaucratic rather than due to any food safety violation.
 

miosux

Alfrescian
Loyal
You have given a good explanation on why licenses are needed and I agree with you. However, if you read the 1st post, the vendors who got chased out already have a license to sell ice cream. What they don't have is a license to sell at Orchard. Therefore, the problem is bureaucratic rather than due to any food safety violation.

but what about the existing hawkers who ARE allowed to ply on orchard rd? as the article said, the legit hawkers are seeing a 30-40% drop in their incomes because of competition.

the crux of the matter is that orchard rd can only support X no. of ice cream vendors. too many, and they all go bust (or worse, become like newton and start charging $50 for ice cream to tourist)

nonetheless, we reap what we sow. since we collectively voted for this gov, we'll have to suck thumb and watch them steam roll us with bureaucracy.
 

Cthulhu

Alfrescian
Loyal
but what about the existing hawkers who ARE allowed to ply on orchard rd? as the article said, the legit hawkers are seeing a 30-40% drop in their incomes because of competition.

the crux of the matter is that orchard rd can only support X no. of ice cream vendors. too many, and they all go bust (or worse, become like newton and start charging $50 for ice cream to tourist)

nonetheless, we reap what we sow. since we collectively voted for this gov, we'll have to suck thumb and watch them steam roll us with bureaucracy.

If I read correctly, the main reason cited for poor business is the recession. A lot of businesses get affected by the economy. It is up to the owner to think of new ways to make money. If they can only survive due to "protectionism", there is no hope already.

As for how many vendors Orchard can support, it is up to the market to decide. In a none communist economy, we don't have to be so nice and do central planning for people. They as businessmen should be able to adjust accordingly to survive.

I am just a person who likes free enterprise. If someone has a business idea that does not endanger public safety or cause a nuisance, they should be allowed to have a go. No point handicapping them with pointless restrictions. We leave the success or failure of the enterprise entirely up to the individual person.
 

myfoot123

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Did NEA give license to prostitute in Geylang? This kind of trade is also unhygienic. If someone get sick after eating "chicken", who is responsible?

Singapore cannot have double standard, you restrict people selling ice cream in orchard road but allow PRC selling chicken in Geylang. What kind ofl logic!!
 

halsey02

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Did NEA give license to prostitute in Geylang? This kind of trade is also unhygienic. If someone get sick after eating "chicken", who is responsible?

Singapore cannot have double standard, you restrict people selling ice cream in orchard road but allow PRC selling chicken in Geylang. What kind ofl logic!!

Does the 'chicken' sell ice-cream also?, then the NEA will be concern!:p They are the antidote needed for those with an irrepressible itch, you won't want the FT's etc..to run loose, commiting crimes of passion & the flesh!, do you?:wink:
 

miosux

Alfrescian
Loyal
I am just a person who likes free enterprise. If someone has a business idea that does not endanger public safety or cause a nuisance, they should be allowed to have a go. No point handicapping them with pointless restrictions. We leave the success or failure of the enterprise entirely up to the individual person.

i think the days of free enterprise as we knew it in the 20th century are over. FE promotes waste and greed and social disequilibrium. but i digress...
 

Cthulhu

Alfrescian
Loyal
i think the days of free enterprise as we knew it in the 20th century are over. FE promotes waste and greed and social disequilibrium. but i digress...

No offence but that is copy and pasted directly from textbook theory. I can only say you don't have a businessman's mindset. Nothing wrong with that. Different people approach things from different angles.
 

miosux

Alfrescian
Loyal
No offence but that is copy and pasted directly from textbook theory. I can only say you don't have a businessman's mindset. Nothing wrong with that. Different people approach things from different angles.

wah serious ah? not bad, i tok kok also can become textbook theory.

so tell me, how does FE NOT promote waste? :confused:
 

Cthulhu

Alfrescian
Loyal
wah serious ah? not bad, i tok kok also can become textbook theory.

so tell me, how does FE NOT promote waste? :confused:

Who cares? Maybe you can ask yourself if talking theory can put money in the ice cream seller's pockets. :p
 

Watchman

Alfrescian
Loyal
EXCERPTS OF INTERVIEW

wayangparty: Can you give examples how they twist your words?

Gary: The second case was pertaining to a MC. I had a MC from the clinic and I brought the MC to camp to be endorsed by my MO to prove I really got an MC, but the medical officer after he endorsed the MC, he lost the MC. I went home and after I went back, I was charged for being away from camp. MO refused to admit anything. I got 20 days in detention barracks for not having a MC and for being away from camp. The case is on the record books.

wayangparty: Are you saying the police has been tracing your NS records?

Gary: They know what is recorded. They had been tracking me, I don’t know why.

wayangparty: Do they have the right to force you to sign anything?

Gary: I have the impression that if I do not sign, I will be locked up for 48 hours which is legal under the law.

wayangparty: You mentioned on your blog that threats were made against you. Can you elaborate?

Gary: He said to me at the lift lobby 90% of the exact words - ”Mr Tan,if you walk out of here tomorrow,you might get killed.You might meet with a mysterious accident,you might disappear and nobody will know what happened to you! Mr Tan, some things and people in this country you cannot offend! Some people are above all things! You better make sure you know this! Mr Tan,we can arrange for things to happen to you.You understand or not!”

wayangparty: Who are the people you have criticized?

Gary: I can’t remember, probably most of them, the ministers and leaders. I am very sure I never said anything about MM, SM or PM Lee before, but others probably some of them. Let us not give any names.

wayangparty: Do you have other things to share with us about your experience?

Gary: There is one encounter which is very important. On 10th March 2009, I went back to Cantonment Complex to collect my laptop. I asked the officer what will happen to him. He told me he will advise his superior to drop the charges against me. I still don’t know what case, all I know is that somebody is unhappy with me for posting the molotov cocktail…..He stopped at the exit and said to me: “Gary, last week I told you to write the truth and post it online, why didn’t you do it? I told him “Sir, I don’t think it is a good idea.” Then he told me “Gary, I am going to retire, when I ask you to tell the truth, just go ahead and do it, don’t worry.” He was very insistent for me to write about the truth and post the facts online.

wayangparty: Your post has been on the internet for a week. Has anybody contacted you?

Gary: No, nobody.

wayangparty: What makes you think that Sebastian was from the ISD?

Gary: After I signed the statement, the officer walked me to the door. He made a phone call and I heard him calling Sebastian. I could hear his side of the conversation - “Hey Sebastian, I got the statement from the fellow already. So you ISD people will take over the case from now on, ISD handle right?” That’s how I got to believe that Sebastian and the Malay guy may be from the ISD.

wayangparty: Did the police tell you who make the report against you?

Gary: I did ask him whether it is made by the external public or from their own people. He said it was made by their internal people.
 
Top