Parking on the public roads

EDITOR: A few days ago, Assistant Superintendent Browne of the Royal SVG Police Force made it quite evident that no company in SVG owns any parking spaces on the government road. Additionally, the [officer] suggested that no business or worker is entitled to a parking spot on the government’s road and should not set up any stools or other items there to do so. However, Singer seems to be excluded from this new public pronouncement. As of August 4th, 2025, the inspector’s statements were blatantly and flagrantly disregarded.

Three exquisitely designed wooden, white objects with red letters that read “NO PARKING” and a finely designed silver handle (see image) were installed on August 4th to RESERVE a spot for the organization’s vehicles. Early in the morning, the signs were skilfully placed with a gentle touch, removed as Singer’s large vehicles entered, and put back in place when the vehicles left to reserve the spot.

The public’s attempts to take down the illegal barriers (as instructed by the police) have been met with hostility and opposition.

Last week, a young male employee of the business place gesticulated angrily at and rebuked a non-Singer citizen for parking in “Singer’s spot” on the government’s road.The non-Singer citizen chose to search for parking elsewhere after reportedly feeling bullied and threatened. Two of the wooden signs were then swiftly taken by the young man and put in “Singer’s spot” on the government road. The non-Singer citizen undoubtedly recalled what happened outside of Home Collection, when a young male employee cut a citizen’s tires for parking in a legitimate and appropriate position on the government road. He didn’t want all that smoke.

Another attempt to remove the illegal structures by a different citizen was met with vitriol by another male employee at Singer. The non-Singer male citizen removed two of the three signs and was angrily shouted at. I tremble to think what could have happened if the male citizen had responded similarly. He just went his way. He didn’t want all that smoke from the employee.

The traffic department was notified of Singer’s entitlement and non-compliance on several occasions, but nothing was done. In actuality, a corporal and a sergeant in that department said that the police had no duty to move the objects blocking the government’s public road, while another sergeant said that it was the police’s job and that they were busy and would do it when they are ready.Which is it?

I would like to know who was responsible for moving the chairs and stalls belonging to the merchants during the clean up effort around town. Is Singer’s flexibility greater than that of our vendors? Do Singer’s wooden signs have more worth than the tables and chairs that the vendors used to conduct business? Was the general public instructed to move the vendors’ chairs and stalls, or did the police pick up and move the vendors’ chairs and stalls?

I believe that Singer makes the police nervous.

This is apparent to me, as a young male employee from Singer indicated that he puts out the illegal barricades because he was instructed to do so by his boss, and that his boss’s words supersede those of the police. The police are responsible for maintaining law and order, and if they do nothing to address these apathetic entrepreneurs, there is a good chance that avoidable and preventable situations will occur and lead to conflict. The previous two citizens did not want the smoke; however, there will be one who wants ALLTHE SMOKE, and conflict will arise as a result of ineffective and reactive policing.

A truly concerned citizen and itinerant parker.