Dialogue, before the Breakfast Shed falls silent

2026-03-22 - 00:25

Helen Drayton For 100 years, the Breakfast Shed, named Femmes Du Chalet (The Women of the Shed), has served many as a gathering place where workers, visitors, and families have meals. Long before the big food courts and fast-food businesses appeared across the city, the Breakfast Shed was serving the public. That tradition is why the protracted dispute has drawn public attention. For observers, the most troubling aspect appears to be the apparent absence of dialogue. At a recent press conference and in a series of media interviews, financial consultant Robert Le Hunte — speaking on behalf of the cooperative and the group known as Friends of the Breakfast Shed — outlined several issues deserving examination. What struck me was the issue of the electricity billing. According to reports, a group of small food vendors, operating as a cooperative for more than two decades, has been paying considerably more for electricity under T&TEC’s industrial classification rather than the commercial classification because the building is wired for industrial use. Over the years, the vendors have paid approximately $2 million in electricity costs that were not properly attributable to them. If there was a miscalculation from the inception in wiring the building, who is responsible for the oversight that’s reportedly causing these small struggling vendors to pay approximately $15,000 monthly instead of about $1,500? Regardless of how the situation arose, from a humanitarian perspective, why can’t the relevant parties get together to ensure fairness to the vendors? Reports suggest that to apply the commercial electricity rate, the building must be rewired. The vendors have asked for that to be done. Who’s responsible for rewiring the building? Why should the vendors continue paying for electricity they don’t use and can’t use, given the nature of their business? Isn’t this also a matter of Udecott adhering to its corporate social responsibility policy of “supporting the creation of vibrant and sustainable communities across Trinidad and Tobago?” All too often, business corporations interpret corporate social responsibility very narrowly; sponsorships and charity giving, but these are only the discretionary aspect of that responsibility. Fair trading and adhering to ethical and legal obligations are the critical aspects of corporate social responsibility—to treat customers fairly and to ensure they don’t suffer losses because of the quality of service provided to them. These vendors have been paying their way, although they have arrears of some $2 million. According to reports, over two decades, they have paid about $9 million in combined rent and electricity charges to the relevant authorities, and indeed, they took a beating during the COVID-19 pandemic shutdown. State agencies are reputed for their negligence in consistently collecting property rents, resulting in years of arrears, when the proper business approach is to take immediate action upon default and, failing adherence to schedules, to pursue the ultimate course of eviction, rather than contribute to a situation that has repercussions for both the tenant and landlord. In addition to the arrears juxtaposed with the excessive electricity charges, another matter seems patently unfair. Vendors pay rent for their designated space and should always benefit from it financially. Yet, allegedly, over the years, during Carnival time, the compound was used for other purposes, denying these tenants income. If there isn’t a contractual agreement to that effect, shouldn’t the vendors have been compensated? The problems date back years under the People’s National Movement, the People’s Partnership, the PNM again, and now the United National Congress, involving miscalculations, misunderstandings, and administrative oversights. These vendors are not entities with corporate governance systems. Evidently, they needed help. They have served us for decades. Why must the most vulnerable always be the ones to bear punitive consequences when they are not solely responsible for the situation? Anyone passing by the building would wonder about maintenance and the normal responsibilities that accompany a landlord-tenant relationship. For many citizens, the Breakfast Shed represents a significant and deep-rooted social, cultural and commercial part of the national story dating back to 1926. Progressive development is necessary, but is eviction the only way to treat this small business community? Is there another reason for Udecott’s eviction notice—developmental or financial, (more lucrative vendor contracts)? According to a vendor cooperative statement, “We are confident that with dialogue, these matters can be resolved. What we cannot understand is why dialogue was never allowed to take place.” Before institutions that have served the public for generations fall silent, it seems reasonable, indeed responsible, for the parties to meet and decide whether mutually satisfactory solutions exist. Dialogue strengthens authority and public confidence that fairness and reason still guide national decision-making.