The Unemployment Relief Programme (URP) has, in recent times, come under heavy criticism from various political entities and interest groups asserting that it is a haven for criminal elements and just another form of a “make work” programme by the Government.

One group has called for its immediate removal and for it to be replaced with stipends for unemployed individuals. Many people may view the URP as negative but like VAT, which was highly criticised when it was firstly introduced, its economic value to this day prevents even the most ambitious administrations from removing it, so too is the URP.

Given closer analysis, however, a lot of the negative feedback is highly subjective and baseless. This is not to say that problems don’t exist. With some restructuring, the programme has the potential to become more than another welfare scheme.

When the programme was first introduced it was as called Dewd. It was designed specifically for former convicts as a means to integrate them back into society. Whereas this function still exists today, its scope has also expanded to included single parent women and the socially displaced.

URP, over the years, has enabled governments to ensure that all citizens benefit from the national pie.

Whereas its welfare aspect is usually highlighted and highly criticised, protagonists have failed to recognise the other function of URP—the construction and maintenance of minor infrastructure in communities by people from the community.

URP also has the responsibility of building retaining walls, pavements, box drains, recreational facilities and other infrastructure.

Another feature that is commonly overlooked is the opportunity for community participation. Since it is quite flexible, the URP allows residents to make recommendations for projects to be undertaken on the community’s behalf.

The URP allows for people to develop a sense of civic consciousness. It is usually the first to respond to natural disasters anywhere in the country. The readily available manpower, as well as equipment, enables the area co-ordinator the ability to get assistance to those in need.

It also allows for entrepreneurial development through its special projects programme. This allows for the average man to get involved in the construction business who, outside of such, would not qualify. Although the jobs are relatively small, the experience gained would allow them to venture into more ambitious projects with regional corporations and other state enterprises.

The allegations of corruption associated with the URP over the years have given it a bad stigma. It is unfortunate that the dark side of our human nature has gotten the best of some who take advantage of the flexible features of the programme. This is a problem that has plagued several administrations and, often, efforts to reduce sometimes result in opportunities for misconduct.

The present administration has been successful in changing the image of the programme. However, more decisive action is needed to eradicate the cancers which exist.

These problems are not widespread but exist, to some degree, in only a few regions. And, they are not unique to URP as almost all state enterprises face similar problems.

People who claim that the URP is a breathing ground for criminals and hence should be stopped are insensitive and show a lack of any understanding of social responsibility.

Has anyone ever considered what may happen if URP is simply discontinued? Communities, especially those in the rural areas, would be disadvantaged. Regional corporations may not be able to pick up this slack. And given their limited budget and larger catchment area, less attention would be given to the minor projects handled by the URP.

The Government, apart from implementing some rigid checks and balances in the programme, has recently introduced a training dimension.

Personal development officers are now responsible for identifying individual needs and directing people to the agencies for training and employment. This would ensure that as skilled workers leave the programme, remaining labourers can be trained to fill these positions until they too secure a better means of employment.

There must also be a change in paradigm from unemployment relief to community building with emphasis placed on the number of projects executed instead of how long and how much people work.

Closer links with other community groups such as churches, schools and even the police are needed. We must remember that the people employed in the URP are there because their skill level, family situation or general background may put restrictions on their marketability.

The URP provides the necessary counselling, training and restraint to ensure that people not only benefit financially but holistically.

The concept of the URP is a good one. With some critical thinking and political will, it can be used to effectively reduce crime, assist single parent homes and build communities in a cost-effective manner.

Those of better economic means must understand that everyone should be allowed to participate in the development of the country despite their creed, race, economic and social disposition.

It is the responsibility of society to ensure that all are catered for and since the poor and disadvantaged will always be with us, the URP and other such programmes are here to stay.

Contact NYL with comments at nylcolumnguardian@yahoo.com or editorial committee, National Youth League, Balisier House, #1 Tranquillity St, Port-of-Spain.

Wesley George is the education officer of the PNM Youth League