By Kieron Murdoch | Opinion Contributor

Much that has happened over the past few weeks has put a spotlight on our social services. While issues surrounding at-risk youth have emphasised the importance of having a system capable of responding to youth who are in crisis, social services are also tasked with responding to struggling households, domestic violence, poverty, homelessness, gender based violence (GBV), child abuse, the elderly who need support, and persons with disabilities, as well as working with the healthcare system to tackle mental health and substance abuse.

It is a lot, and it is what makes our social services among the most important assets that we rely upon, especially as a developing country. We were disheartened therefore when we came across a recent report that stated that “scores of Ministry of Social Transformation staff have been forced to work from home for more than a month after being ordered to move out of their Old Parham Road premises”. The story was run by the Observer on September 14th.

It reported that staff were forced to leave over non-payment of rent, and that the situation has impacted units such as Youth Affairs and Family and Social Services. Against the backdrop of recent events which have emphasised the importance of our social services, and calling to memory a seemingly infinite series of examples of the inadequacy or unavailability of working spaces for government workers, we think it fair to say that the situation above is a disgrace. It needs to be rectified immediately.

Further, the question must be asked: Why does the government of Antigua and Barbuda have a chronic problem housing its public servants in adequate spaces? Whether it’s staff from the Agriculture Ministry, the Post Office, the Police, the Social Transformation Ministry, the High Court, the Health Ministry, the Department of Culture – there are simply too many examples.  Why do issues often come to head, creating the circumstances for strikes, sit-ins, or for staff to be asked to work from home?

In some cases, it is a government building in a state of disrepair. In others, it is a landlord’s building in a state of disrepair. In others, it is a dispute between the government and a landlord over rent. We know the government has repeatedly indicated that the Covid period was disastrous in terms of arrears. Still, something must be done. It causes harmful disruptions to the efficient flow of government business when staff are affected in this way and it harms the morale of those who provide important services to the nation.

The thought has also occurred to us: Is there a chance that the government could ever house all its employees in its own buildings? No, such a thing could not happen overnight. But is it even feasible? Is it desirable? To answer that, we would need to know how much is expended in paying rent to various landlords on an annual basis, and whether a portion of these funds could be used to develop new premises gradually each year. If the answer is no, then something else must be done to ensure that rental arrangements are sustainable and issues do not fester to the point that critical public servants are, for whatever reason, lacking in premises from which to conduct vital work.

At a time when this country is realising that it needs additional qualified social workers, youth intervention specialists, and counsellors, to respond to issues in society, we must say that such a boost in qualified staff seems far off if we are having difficulty housing some of the existing staff who administer or deliver our current social services. So, what is to be done?

If it has not done so already, it might be worthwhile for the government to carry out a credible audit of all that it owns, all that it rents, all the maintenance that it does, and all the demands for maintenance that are outstanding, to determine how much value it is getting for money. How many staff are housed in spaces with ongoing and recurring problems that need to be addressed. How much are these issues impacting productivity?

Is renting or owning is the more sustainable solution in the long term? Would it be worthwhile or even feasible to own more real estate? If not, then what are the main challenges with rented properties? Who is responsible for maintenance and refurbishment? At times, the reason the government is renting a space for a particular department of workers in the first place is because a previously used government owned building is in a state of rot or disrepair. If maintenance is not adequate, having more property would not be an effective solution. How are contracts for rented premises awarded? Is there value to be gained from an improved procedure?

We seem to have fallen into the habit of accepting that every year, multiple times a year, public servants across various Ministries and Departments (in our tiny 108 square mile island) will sick-out, sit-in, strike, or protest, because their premises, whether owned or leased, are deplorable, or, they will be without premises for unduly long periods of time because of the absence of alternatives to a space they previously occupied. Why is this acceptable? Has it been the norm so long that it has now become outlandish to suggest that it is not good enough? Are citizens not entitled to call this a disgrace?

About the writer:

Kieron Murdoch worked as a journalist and later as a radio presenter in Antigua and Barbuda for eight years, covering politics and governance especially. He is an opinion contributor at antigua.news. If you have an opinion on the issues raised in this editorial and you would like to submit a response by email to be considered for publication, please email staff@antigua.news.