Moot: Littering is not taken seriously in Guyana

Ashmina Jagoo, 1st Speaker Speech. (5 mins)

Esteemed judges, madam moderator, members of the opposition, keen audience, good
morning to you all. In support of the moot, my team is tasked with showing that there is
great merit in the moot which states that “Littering is not taken seriously in Guyana.”
Any other belief is, of course, fallacious!

Please allow me to first define the key terms in the moot, “Littering and Seriously”.
According to the Environmental Protection (Litter Enforcement) Regulations (2013),
Littering refers to making a particular place unclean with garbage or a huge amount of
unwanted objects or items left lying about. While the term litter was not directly used in
the moot, it is also pertinent to define it as any form of material such as bottles, animal
remains, sawdust, garbage, or any liquid substance that is considered litter, as defined by
the Minister and published in the Gazette. Seriously is defined by the Macmillan
dictionary as ‘in a way that shows that you think something is important, in a way that is
bad or dangerous to make you worried.’

Knowledgeable judges, the moot "Littering is not taken seriously in Guyana" proposes to
explore the extent to which littering is a problem and the effectiveness of measures taken
to address it.

As the first speaker, I will briefly discuss and highlight the general consequences of
littering, and bring to your attention ineffective strategic plans that were implemented to
curb the issue of littering. The second speaker will examine the ineffectiveness of the
Environmental Protection Agency’s Litter Regulation (2013) by comparing it with litter
regulations of other countries. She will also outline effective regulations and laws of
other countries which can be mirrored by Guyana to help curb the issue of littering. Last
but not least, the third speaker will briefly discuss the sociological and psychological
attitudes of society toward littering and sum up the first and second speakers' arguments.

Ravin Singh in his 2016 Environmental report stated that littering can be detrimental to a
country and its people. It can hinder the economic stability of a country since garbage
does not attract tourists. Many people who live in polluted areas suffer from diseases
such as dengue and leptospirosis.

Wise judges, assiduous members of the opposition, attentive audience, I am sure at some
time or the other, you all would have passed Bourda Market and were in complete
distress about the garbage and foul smell from the vicinity. But, have you ever wondered
why there has been no grasp on the situation?

According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Litter Enforcement

Regulation (2013) “prohibits anyone from improper waste disposal” which is an offense
punishable by law. The agency further noted that “the absence of a receptacle is not an
excuse.” However, there is a disconnection in the regulation between what it sets out to
be achieved and what is actually being enforced.

We have acknowledged that the President, Dr. Airfan Ali, and the Minister within the
Ministry of Public Infrastructure have initiated several clean-up campaigns. Yet, Richard
Francois, from the Kaieteur News, on 8th January 2023 published an article titled
“Ending littering in Guyana: A hopeless delusion or a promising reality?”, where
several images of the atrocious piles of garbage on the parapets of Georgetown were
broadcast. This brings me to the point that these campaigns are just for a short period of
time and do not tackle the underlying littering problem which continues to be a recurring
one.

More so, in order to reduce litter the Environmental Protection Agency proposed a ban
on the importation, manufacture, distribution, and use of single plastic bags and other
containers made of plastic in 2021. However, plastic containers and bags continue to be
common in stores and supermarkets. Esteemed Judges, do you think the business sector is
concerned about the number of plastic items they produce daily and their detrimental
effects on the environment? NO! Money gah mek!

And yet still the opposition dares to propel that littering is t aken seriously in Guyana.
Evidently, we immediately see that the Regulations Act is not sufficient and is
ineffective. Hence, the members of the proposition strongly support the moot which
states that Littering is not taken seriously in Guyana!

REBUTTAL
I rise as the first speaker once again in agreement with the affirmative, Littering is not
taken seriously in Guyana. It is imperative that we as citizens take responsibility for our
actions and actively work towards keeping our environment clean. As our arguments
would have proven, irrespective of the legislature and ‘how much clean up campaigns’
the government keeps, it would never be enough to simply rely on others to clean up after
us or to wait for government policies to be put in place. Enforcement!! Enforcement!!
Enforcement!! How many times do we have to ring this word in the ears of the
opposition? Additionally, to such, we MUST each take it upon ourselves to make a
conscious effort to reduce our waste and properly dispose of it.

Honorable judges, please allow me to enlighten you on some frivolous claims made by
the opposition in their failure to discredit the affirmative.

1. Firstly, …
2. Secondly, …
3. Thirdly, …
And finally, Esteemed Judges, While my team presented information and statistics
substantiating the affirmative, the opposing team’s arguments only focused on the
ineffective strategies that were implemented to curb the problem of littering for a short
period of time. We do not think, feel, or believe. We know from statistical findings and
authoritative proof that it is vexatious, fallacious, Frivolous, nonsensical, specious, and
unmeritorious to believe that littering is taken seriously in Guyana.