Copyright newsday
THE NATIONAL Recruitment Drive is a commendable initiative. At least 110,000 applications were received, which shows that there has been an unmet need for engagements like this for too long. But amid a slew of questions concerning unemployment support, funding and long-term job creation, the exercise risks becoming a shallow one unless the government goes beyond PR and supplies proper answers. The Prime Minister’s mixed messaging on Cepep and URP cuts on October 23 did not help. Visiting the National Cycling Centre, Couva, where the drive to fill existing state sector vacancies was being run, Ms Persad-Bissessar cast herself as a saviour, noting Cepep jobs did not allow access to mortgages. “That was just hand-to-mouth feeding,” she said. “That is how I saw it, and I was very determined not to put people through that kind of slavery, and some members of my Cabinet fought me.” Yet – even putting aside the trivialisation of slavery inherent in these words – one would be hard-pressed to reconcile Ms Persad-Bissessar’s avowed caring with the manner in which her administration got rid of these workers. The move came like a thief in the night. Termination letters were abruptly handed out. There was no prior announcement. Since members of her administration “fought” her, she might have expected an outcry. That only worsens the way the government acted. The PM’s position is also inconsistent with her government’s overgeneralisation of these programmes as being tied to nepotism, the unlawful renewal of contracts, “ghosts,” and gangs. Corruption is undoubtedly a problem across the state sector. But if one follows the government’s reasoning to its end, it should close every other state agency where a procurement lapse is found or suspected. Does that happen? Why have two make-work programmes been singled out? Little is being said about where the money will come from to pay workers once vacancies are filled, not to mention secure the ten per cent hike for existing positions. Maybe ministers hope to fund recurrent expenditure through contract work cuts, which is something Ms Persad-Bissessar has put on the table. Missing, too, is clarification of the budget’s “employment fund” and whether it differs from the unemployment levy. According to the government, 70,600 people lost work under the PNM. The opposition claims 30,000 were further retrenched since April. But the recruitment drive covers 20,450. That’s no small amount. Still, Ms Persad-Bissessar acknowledges the gap between demand and supply. Her administration’s drive is a step in the right direction. However, the PM needs to account properly and to state, perhaps during the Senate budget debate, what plans are in the works to generate new opportunities, not just fill existing posts. Having been elected to serve the people, that is her job.
