By Dr Selwyn R. Cudjoe
July 05, 2025
The tears flowed copiously. A United National Congress Government had broken its key promise, “When UNC wins everybody wins”; some people, it seems, have lost. In the seven weeks of its administration the Government suspended CEPEP contractors, and by extension 10,000 workers who made $120 a day or $28,000 working 48 weeks a year.
While anybody would be sympathetic to the fact that 10,000 workers may be without a job temporarily, the real question is how much money do these contractors make from these deals as opposed to the workers? Who is likely to lose by the suspension of these contracts: the contractors or the workers?
This, as I understand it, is how these contracts work. A Member of Parliament is given several contracts to distribute among his friends, called CEPEP contractors. A contract is worth about $23,000 monthly to the contractor who manages three gangs of ten people.
It is alleged that certain ministers of government will give these contracts to their friends and families. Usually the minister charges the contractors about $5,000 a month. Given all of his/her expenses, a contractor can make about $15,000 a month; $180,000 a year. Since these contractors usually obtain a three-year contract s/he can make about $540,000 over the period of his contract. Some contracts run about five or six years.
It would be nice to know how much money the top 100 contractors made over the last three years.
On Wednesday, Marvin Gonzales and Senator Faris-Al-Rawi called the suspension of CEPEP workers “vindictive and wicked”. A pre-action protocol letter to CEPEP CEO Keith Eddy alleges: “The abrupt purported termination of the contract, along with others, will severely impact thousands of people, including vulnerable workers and their families, who have lost accrued benefits without notice.”
The URP was established in 1993 to provide short-term employment opportunities to vulnerable individuals. It aimed to reduce poverty and unemployment. The CEPEP programme, established July 2002, was designed to protect, enhance and beautify the environment.
Anyone seeing the CEPEP workers performing their duties would not be alarmed that a new government would have wanted to take a look at its operation. For example, the official working hours of CEPEP workers are from 6 a.m. to noon and/or 7 a.m. to 1 p.m. Usually, they begin their jobs at 6 or 7 a.m. By 10 or 11 a.m. they are gone.
Perhaps the worst aspect of this beautifying endeavour is the sight of two women holding up a blind while a man with a whacker cuts the grass. Is this the best way to utilise the labour skills of these workers? How do these non-productive jobs enhance the productive capacity of these workers?
Between 2001 and 2007 while Hazel Manning was the minister of education, I sent a memorandum to her suggesting that she include an education component in the CEPEP programme. I advised that each CEPEP worker should be required to attend an educational programme once or twice a week. I was not particularly concerned about the CEPEP worker as I was about their children. Since children are natural imitators, if they saw their parents reading or writing they were likely to follow their parents.
In my estimation, one of the major defects in our society is the low level of social and cultural development of some of our citizens. This educational component was intended to raise the educational and cultural levels of these workers. It will make them better citizens.
The suspension of CEPEP for a short period, while the ministry investigates what the CEPEP programme should do, should cause little harm especially when the populace voted in overwhelming numbers for new ways of doing things. Following PNM and its crocodile tears is only likely to send us to the nadir of the past.
The UNC was mandated to look after the welfare of the poor and indigent rather than privileged members of the society and those who profit on the backs of the poor. We should not allow the PNM to take us back to the irrelevance of the past. While PNM likes to say what cannot be done; the UNC, a progressive movement, is willing to explore what can be done and explore new ways of doing things.
No one will die because an obsolete programme is being re-constructed to ensure better outcomes. The PNM had its opportunities. They should be open to how new approaches to old problems will work.
When PM Kamla Persad-Bissessar decided it was immoral to give a Squatter Prime Minister one million dollars a year for one month’s work, she signalled we cannot continue with business as usual while the society crumbles. This is why the country elected her to run the country.