The furore over exam fees has provided a serendipitous probing of the national psyche and laid bare our debilitating need for the government to provide all the things that hard work and a responsible lifestyle ought to put at our disposal. A ?cradle to the grave? social system that is underpinned by a wide range of subsidies granted to everyone irrespective of financial solvency has resulted in the dangerous erosion of individual responsibility and the institution of a political culture that insists on making unsustainable promises for electoral purposes.

Elections in Paradise Island have turned into unseemly auctions where the highest bidders for a wide range of freebies to an unquestioning electorate will be voted into power; and the slow realisation will then dawn that there is no money to finance the outlandish promises made from the back of a lorry in order to bribe voters. Despite clear evidence that we simply have not got any more money to give away, the government inaugurated its reign by spending hundreds of millions of rupees in providing free transport for all students and old age pensioners irrespective of their financial circumstances. The manner of its implementation was as cack-handed as its profligacy was economically stupid and the major beneficiaries so far have been the bus companies who get paid a huge daily allowance irrespective of the number of eligible passengers that they carry ? a situation tailor made for the unscrupulous to maximise their profits by leaving old people stranded at bus stops in order to make extra money by picking up fare paying passengers further down the road. I wrote two papers over a year ago explaining how it would have been far better for a monthly allowance to be given to pensioners so that they could decide how to use it; and that the fares for schoolchildren should have been given directly to parents to reflect the exact school attendance over the previous month. This would have achieved the dual purpose of facilitating access to education for every school child and helping parents to monitor properly the attendance record of their children. Sensible readers would realise of course that this option is bound to be ignored by the government as it is too logical and all our governments have performed so far with a combination of huge incompetence and terrible lack of vision.

We seem to have turned into a nation gripped by fear; fear of the rise in crime and the apparent impotence of the forces of Law and Order to combat a level of violence that seems to be getting worse with every passing day. Most of all, we seem to have become paralysed by the fear of change and our politicians cause a great disservice to this country by pandering to that fear.

Private tuition has given rise to an educational apartheid that benefits those who can afford the extortionate fees and condemns the poor.

William Hazlitt once described hypocrisy as the only vice that cannot be forgiven and it would be hard to feel anything but sheer contempt for the amount of hypocritical drivel being spouted by self serving individuals clamouring for the return of subsidies on SC and HSC exam fees. Compare these two statements by the same individual: 1/ in 2004, Pravind Jugnauth spoke on behalf of the MMM-MSM government and said in his budget speech that ?A fundamental reform that this Budget introduces is the targeting of Government transfers [?] Government transfers are simply not sustainable if they are universal and open-ended.? He was specifically referring to limiting the old age state pension only to those earning less than Rs 20,000 per month and he clearly indicated that targetting will also apply to exam fees. Both measures stemmed from a very laudable political courage and a realistic grasp of our economic circumstances that had escaped all previous ministers of finance. 2/ in 2007, Pravind Jugnauth now describes the same targetting of subsidies that he espoused in 2004 as ?a crime?, a ?massacre?, and has initiated a poster campaign with this economically illiterate slogan: ?L?EDUCATION NA PENA PRIX ? APÉ COQUIN NOU DROIT ? BISIN LEV AR ZOT?. Such contradiction and hypocrisy deserve no further comment apart from the obvious observation that most people can detect shameless opportunism especially when it masquerades itself as the saviour of our children?

But the prize for nauseating hypocrisy and talking out of the wrong orifice must surely go to the teachers and teaching unions who are now presenting themselves as the arch defenders of a free education system. An education system that has been free on paper since 1976 has been subverted into a mercenary enterprise by the very people charged with the destiny of our children; parents have been coerced into paying vast amounts of money to teachers so that their children can complete the syllabus in the teachers? home rather than in school. By failing to teach the whole syllabus at school, teachers are forcing parents to fork out huge sums of money in order to ensure the academic success that a free education system was supposed to encourage. This rabid extortion of money from parents is condoned by spineless politicians of all parties and you will not hear one member of the many vocal groups forming to oppose the removal of subsidies question the morality of such mercenary behaviour.

Parents are paying far more now in tuition fees than they ever paid as school fees before education became non paying. The fees for tuition in one subject average Rs 400-Rs500 a month and a simple calculation will tell you that this is far more than the amount of the subsidies whose removal is causing such concern. Why are all our politicians quiet about this? Why have the college principals/rectors taken this ludicrous vow of silence when the real crime is being perpetrated under their noses, in their classrooms, and by members of staff under their leadership? What is the point of a so called free education system when money once earmarked for school fees is now going directly into the pockets of teachers to supplement an already generous salary? These people will no doubt tell me that private tuition is not illegal; well, so is cigarette smoking and the lung cancer caused by one activity is replicated by the cancer in our education system caused by a parallel, immoral educational industry that has no place in a really free education system.

Private tuition has given rise to an educational apartheid that benefits those who can afford the extortionate fees and condemns the poor to making do with whatever the teacher condescendingly chooses to teach in the classroom. That is the real scandal and the sight of teaching unions jumping on the anti subsidy bandwagon whilst conveniently and cynically ignoring the biggest drain on parents? financial resources that private tuition symbolizes is rather akin to the gluttonous shark complaining that the fish it feeds on are not playing the game by not producing enough food for its bottomless stomach.

Up until 1998, school exam fees were met in full by parents, irrespective of their economic situation. The current government initiative removes this burden completely from those earning less than Rs 7,500 a month, i.e. those who would have been left behind in the educational apartheid world created by a private tuition system that they cannot afford. Am I the only one therefore who thinks that the terrible cacophony created by the teaching unions and abjectly followed by opposition party politicians is designed with one thing in mind only? That the subsidy clamoured for everyone will be very useful in convincing parents to use that money for more private tuition?

I do however agree that the salary limits imposed by the government are farcical; it would have been far better for every parent to be allowed to benefit from the loan scheme at advantageous rates that is currently available to only those earning less than Rs 10,000. Banks have been making enormous profits and I am sure they would have loved the opportunity to show some civic spirit? After all, they could do far worse than following the lead of British banks which advance loans to students at 0% interest rates, which will then be reimbursed many years later and only when the student has reached a manageable income level.

It is high time for adults to learn to live within their own means. Do you buy Kentucky fried chicken or do you decide to make the revolting thing yourself at home at a fraction of its cost? Do you get carried away with the hysteria surrounding one day called Valentine?s Day and spend a fortune on that one day or do you treat the one you claim to love with an affection all year round that is both spontaneous and costs nothing? Do you continue to buy that packet of cigarette or a bottle of beer everyday or do you save that money to help your children?s? future whilst improving your own health? Do you buy a car, pay for private tuition, purchase branded goods that cost a fortune merely because it has someone?s name or logo on it, buy the latest, hugely expensive mobile phone that provides the same basic function of making a phone call as a cheap one, all because the neighbours have opted for the expensive option?

If the answer is yes, I am not surprised that many people scream blue murder whenever any measures to rehabilitate the economy are promulgated. We have become addicted to subsidies and the withdrawal symptoms are only too apparent whenever we are asked to do without them.

<B>R.A.J. </B>