<B>On retiring at 65</B>

While the Minister of Finance has justified the pushing up of retirement from 60 to 65 from social security perspective, where less people will contribute for the old, the Minister has not found much to say about the unemployed HSC holders and graduates. He could only state that graduates will be provided training against a peanut stipend of Rs 3 000 but which does not guarantee any permanent employment.

I have carefully made a critical assessment, which many will share my view, that this condition will have a negative impact on the UNEMPLOYED and who will have to wait for five years more for the 65-year aged to retire before any vacancies can be filled, leave apart the enormous sum to be disbursed after PRB revision.

For purpose of clarity, I have made a mathematical study of a case of how much it will cost at 60 and 65 of a salary holder.

Supposing an officer draws a top salary or Rs 20,000, a retirement he will benefit: (a) a lump sum of Rs 500,000, (b) a pension of Rs 10,000 (approximately).

In the event of retirement at 60, the government will benefit from the Rs 10,000 left to fill up a vacancy thus diminishing the rate of unemployed by one:one ratio.

If on the other hand, the same officer retires at 65, and with a provision of PRB adjustment of, say, Rs 5,000, the officer will draw at 65: (a) a lump sum of Rs 625,000, (b) a pension of Rs 12,500 (approximately).

In other word the 65-year old officer will have benefited an excess of Rs 300,000 yearly or Rs 1,500,000 at 65, which sum could have been easily allocated to HSC holders or new graduates who join the job market after each academic year.

Now this isolated case is just an example of Rs 20,000 salary holder. How about those drawing Rs 30,000, Rs 40,000 or Rs 50,000 monthly? The budget is heavy.

Although we cannot go against government policy once imposed, a better alternative would be a retirement at 62, while opening avenues for the young undergraduates and graduates. There are many of them on the street living in frustration.

It is the duty of MLA in opposition to direct PQ to the government on the number of demands flowing at PSC for each vacancy advertised. The situation is critical.

The government should therefore leave the option open for officers willing to retire at 60, giving place for redynamism to the present situation which is already chaotic with growing inefficiency in public sector. How much would you expect at 60 plus when officers are wrinkled and developing tremours. Can we equate women at par with men already enslaved with household chores to meet the challenge at 60 and above?

If the government wishes to go ahead, let him retain few experienced ones on contract, but for godsake kindly leave the door open for younger generation who are battling for their survival in this socially aristocratic society.

<B>An unemployed</B>

<B>?Chaque cas doit être traité séparément?</B>

Un campement, selon Larousse, est un lieu équipé d?abris, d?installations temporaires et définit exactement les logements construits sur le littoral par nos ancêtres au début du siècle dernier. Utiliser ce terme aujourd?hui en parlant des résidences à la mer n?a aucun sens, et cela peut influencer ? sans qu?il ne le réalise ? la vision qu?a le ministre Sithanen des dispositions financières des citoyens vivant sur la côte.

Il y a 35 ans, j?ai acquis un terrain d?une surface de 1 A 60 à la Pointe d?Esny sur des pas géométriques face à la mer. Le gouvernement qui limitait alors la surface d?un terrain à bail à 1 A 25, ne pouvait réduire la dimension de ce lot. J?y ai construit ma maison qui est ma seule résidence depuis ce temps.

J?ai pris ma retraite à l?âge de 68 ans ; j?en ai 83 aujourd?hui. Cette maison et son terrain sont la totalité de mon patrimoine, celui pour lequel j?ai travaillé depuis mon retour de l?université à l?âge de 22 ans, et que j?espérais léguer à mes enfants.

Contrairement à M. Tim Taylor qui trouve les mesures annoncées par le ministre des Finances justifiées ? voir l?express-dimanche de ce jour ? je suis dans l?impossibilité de poser quelques millions sur la table pour avoir le droit d?occuper ma maison.

M. Sithanen ne me laisse aucun choix : je dois laisser courir le présent bail, quitte à ce que mes enfants voient l?Etat s?approprier ce bien à son expiration.

S?il n?est pas décidé au Parlement que chaque cas doit être traité séparément, selon ses mérites, et si les propositions du ministre sont votées telles que définies dans le discours du 9 juin dernier, des injustices inhumaines seront commises. Et ce n?est pas parce que ces injustices ne blesseront qu?une minorité de la population que l?image de notre pays en sortira grandie !

<B>Réné ANTELME</B>