BLAME IT ON THE GOVERNMENT
February 8, 2013, By KNews, Filed Under Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom, Source
There is almost an instinctive propensity for persons to either blame or hold the government responsible for even the most trivial of problems.
A schoolchild is attacked by another child and the government is blamed for this single act of violence within our schools.
A mentally ill person attacks a schoolboy and suddenly there is concern that the government is not doing anything to take these mentally ill persons off the streets.
The roads of Georgetown are in a poor state. The government is only responsible for public roads, yet the poor conditions of ordinary roads are often laid at the feet of the government.
The garbage overflow in Georgetown is the responsibility of the local municipality which collects rates and taxes from citizens to aid in the collection of refuse. Yet whenever there is a debate about the awful conditions in Georgetown, the question is often asked as to what the government is doing.
The government shoulders a great deal of blame for problems that do not concern the government. It is part of a process of political deflection.
Instead of ascribing blame to those culpable, it is more politically expedient for blame to be placed at the feet of the government.
The situation gets more preposterous when it comes to crime. Two days ago, three men were shot by the police while allegedly committing a crime in the city. The reactions by the public have by and large been condemnatory of those killed, but in between there have been comments blaming the government for the fact that these young men entered into a life of crime.
So the government is held responsible for the life choices of these men who met their end while purportedly attempting to rob an establishment.
There is a clear political agenda at work. There are persons who are so traumatized by the fact that the party they support is not in power- and has been out of power for so long – that almost everything under the sun is blamed on the government. Even when it comes to the lifestyle choices of persons, political explanations are weaved into the fray.
One day the government is going to be blamed for the sun rising in the east.
One of the favorite arguments heard locally whenever there is a robbery is that the government is not doing anything for young people. This is followed by the view that the government needs to provide something for idle youths.
But why should government provide opportunities for the idle? People are not idle because of the lack of things to do. They are idle because they choose not to do things.
Why should hard-earned taxpayers’ monies be used to provide schemes for those who do not wish to work or make little attempt to seek employment?
One such scheme is of course National Service. And this is the point that those who blame the government wish to introduce. Suggesting there is a need to revert to National Service provides justification for that initiative and thus provides credibility for the previous government which introduced this measure. The concern boils down to politics.
There have been calls for National Service to be reintroduced so as to prevent idle youths from engaging in criminal activities. Yet no empirical evidence has been produced to support the contention that placing persons in schemes such as National Service, as opposed to other forms of skills training programmes, will reduce crime.
All governments need to make social interventions to help reduce crime. Amongst the interventions should be programmes aimed at youths and programmes aimed specifically at troubled youths.
There have been such interventions. The present administration undertakes a number of skills-training programmes, including providing industrial training for young people.
Thousands of youths are trained each year and this is a much wiser investment than a paramilitary scheme that is aimed at simply absorbing those who are said to be idle.
If taxpayers’ monies are going to be deployed, they should be deployed in equipping young people with skills so that they can go out there and earn, not by placing them in an institution which is a drain on the resources of the State, resources which can be deployed more productively and efficiently.
There are many young people in this country who refuse to be idle. There are many others who despite not having a job do not take to crime. This is a life choice that they make. They stay along the straight and narrow path, despite things not being the best with them.
It is not idleness that is the cause of crime. In fact, many of those who are caught engaging in crime do so not for the want of opportunities or the lack of skills, they make their own choice to engage in a life of crime, and therefore when they are caught, they must face the consequences. And for that the government should not be blamed.
