I support the Government’s attempt to address waste, corruption, and mismanagement, but we must ask, at what cost?
On June 27, 2025, the Government terminated the contracts of over 300 CEPEP contractors, which led to an estimated 10,500 workers losing their jobs. The official justification, given by the Minister of Public Utilities, was to allow a full audit of the programme after uncovering irregularities. Less than a week later, on July 2, some 4,608 workers and contractors attached to the National Reforestation and Watershed Programme were fired.
Then, on September 10, an undisclosed number of workers under the Unemployment Relief Programme (URP) were terminated with immediate effect, given one month’s salary, before being sent home. The reason given by the Minister of Rural Development and Local Government is an undeniable, urgent need to root out “ghost gangs” and “rampant corruption”.
No one of conscience would argue in favour of corruption. The squandering of public funds is theft from every citizen. However, the Government’s approach is not a surgical strike on corruption but rather a scorched earth policy on the livelihoods of the most vulnerable. Which minister speaks for the workers?
These are not line items on a balance sheet. They are real people. Their dismissal has immediate, devastating consequences. Families already struggling are now unable to put food on the table, pay rent, meet utility bills, send their children to school, or buy medication. Overnight, their lives have been thrown into chaos.
The Government has been swift with the axe but silent on the remedy. What comprehensive plan exists to cushion this fall? Where are the social safety nets, retraining programmes, emergency income support measures or the clear timeline for when and how these vital community programmes will be restructured and reinstated? Where is the plan for transitioning workers into sustainable employment if these programmes are cancelled? These are not luxuries; they are moral obligations when thousands of livelihoods are destroyed in one stroke of the pen.
To leave thousands in limbo is not good governance; it is a dereliction of duty to the very people the State is meant to serve.
The irony is striking. While the poorest are asked to shoulder the burden of fighting corruption, the Government itself has not led by example. This administration presides over the largest and most expensive Cabinet in our history. On assuming office, they did not reject the hefty salary increases recommended by the Salaries Review Commission (SRC) and accepted by the last administration, even as they claim the State is broke.
When questioned, the Prime Minister insisted she “had no choice” but to accept the increases for herself and her ministers. That is simply not true. If the increases have been formally implemented, the Government can, by legislative intervention, reverse the implementation.
Such intervention would accord with the principled position taken in 1998, when the SRC submitted a report recommending salary increases. Then prime minister Basdeo Panday made the decision to exclude Members of Parliament and himself from any pay rise but accepted the recommendations in respect of, inter alia, public and judicial officers. It was a symbolic but profound act. It demonstrated that leadership is not about privilege; it is about sacrifice. It showed that in times of fiscal challenges, leaders cannot ask citizens to sacrifice while rewarding themselves.
Fast-forward to today, and the picture could not be more different. From October 2023, the current SRC recommendations set Cabinet ministers’ base salaries at $52,159 per month, Junior Ministers at $43,155, Parliamentary Secretaries at $22,695, and Senators at $17,020. The Prime Minister herself now earns $87,847 monthly.
Let us examine the math. The SRC recommendations place the monthly salary bill for the Prime Minister, her 23 Cabinet ministers, four junior ministers, and six parliamentary secretaries at approximately $1.6 million. That is nearly $19.2 million per year in base salaries alone, before allowances for housing or transport are added.
So here is the contradiction: you cannot claim fiscal prudence while feathering your own nest. You cannot speak of national sacrifice while refusing to lead by example. Leadership in crisis demands protecting the most vulnerable, not making them the first and only casualties in a war on corruption.
Corruption must be addressed, and the Government is right to pursue accountability. But it is tragically wrong to believe the fight can only be achieved on the backs of the poor. There is a better way. A government serious about reform would phase out questionable contracts while simultaneously creating alternative employment opportunities. It would ensure that audits and investigations are targeted and evidence-based.
Most importantly, a government serious about fairness would demand of itself the same sacrifices it asks of others. Until it finds the will to lead with humility and sacrifice, as it demands of others, its words on corruption will ring hollow, drowned out by the cries of thousands of families wondering how they will survive tomorrow.
The truth is, austerity without equity breeds resentment, distrust, and despair. If the Government continues down this road, it risks not only social unrest but also the erosion of its credibility.
Mickela Panday is an attorney and the political leader of the Patriotic Front.
