In the upcoming Economic Committee of the Municipality of Kythera, the Mayor makes a recommendation for the approval of a regulation for the (400 years old) bazaar of Kythera River. It is right to have a regulation, it is a requirement of the Law (4191/2017) and can contribute to its improvement. But it must be done with this very logic, to help improve and strengthen it, not undermine it.
I believe that Kytherians and visitors to our island expect the Mayor and the Municipal Authority to do everything possible, while remaining within the framework of the law, to strengthen this critical traditional activity.
For example, to rely on decisions of the Ministry of Commerce that reflect the peculiar character of the bazaar of Potamos as reflected in the Decree (Government Gazette 61/12-04-1927, Issue A) and to protect its activities (e.g. to maintain the sale of fresh food products (which the proposal fortunately respects based on the reply letter to the Municipality of Kythera of the Ministry of Economy and Development, No. 45373-26/04/2018).
As otherwise the proposal threatens to have disastrous consequences for the bazaar (including the possibility of its relocation!) And as such, I believe it threatens to drag down the entire economic activity of the bazaar, including the shops, with consequences for the entire economy of Kythera for which the Potamos bazaar has been a focal point for centuries.
Instead of another justification of its importance, perhaps more revealing is the video of Dimitris of Marsellus which I'm sure many people have seen on YouTube. It's worth noting the breadth of activities that develop around the bazaar, economic, cultural and social, to understand what is threatened.
I do not intend to make a «trial of intent» as to why such a proposal is being made. I am fully covered by the criticism from Manos, Dimitris and George (the municipal faction «Kythera - We live here»).
I believe the alternative proposal of «We Live Here» is the approach that our island needs. An approach that creates and strengthens the bargain for the benefit of the entire island. One that recognises and supports, all creative activity and added value on our island. So that it is supported and developed and ideally brings more creative people to our island and generates new activities.
Because the River Bazaar has been preserved for 400 years precisely because it has been able to regenerate and incorporate new activities into its activities. Including the activities of the office shops etc. which are of course open on Sundays
I would hope that the majority municipal party will reconsider. And have a really broad discussion, including in-person discussions (real or online) with everyone.
I hope the dominant faction of the municipal government will set up «euphonious acid» and «synthesize» rather than divide. Otherwise, it can be sure that those dynamics will be formed within our island that will allow the Tsiriyotiko people to effectively defend their traditions, abolish one bad regulation and establish another that respects them.
PS 1: In relation to the handicrafts, which for over 20 years have become an integral part of the bazaar. Law 4197 provides (Article 45):
«Article 45
Availability of works of art, artifacts, handicrafts, folk art
1. Natural persons who create works of art, works of art, handicrafts and other works of original, exclusively their own artistic creation may make their works available to the public, provided that they obtain an administrative permit. Beneficiaries of such licences are also Social and Solidarity Economy Organisations (SSEs) for the disposal of works exclusively produced by their members....»
Why does the majority proposal exclude them? It is not a stimulus to economic activity (subject to the law's requirements for tax etc. compliance of course)
PS2. I quote the decision of the Prefecture of 1955. Apart from its historical value, it also shows what the basis is. Which must be respected.
PS3. Unfortunately, we have repeated cases where the municipal majority or the bodies of their choice appear to be in opposition to the mood of the people (see recently the rather unfortunate case with the rentals of the ECSC). Personally, this makes me very sad. Is it not time , BEFORE such potentially divisive decisions go ahead, to have a more comprehensive discussion and seek compositions of opinion and agreement? I personally will applaud both the Mayor (as I have done many times by applauding many aspects of his actions e.g. recycling, projects etc.) and everyone if they move in such a direction.
