- Finally, AKEL claims unconstitutionality?
- What is certain is that its current positions show hypocrisy, while it recently criticised the abolition of the purchase of services
With its position today, AKEL is referring to unconstitutional attempts to take executive decisions from Parliament, engages in an attempt to "sell hope" on the basis of "employment for an indefinite period of time" and to those who have a service purchasing relationship with the public sector, and rails against the President of the Republic.
He berates the President of the Republic and the Government for reporting legislation to the Supreme Court regarding impermissible interference by Parliament in matters relating to permanent employees. But why does he not wait to see the relevant decisions of the Supreme Court and base claims on his own verdicts?
Does AKEL mean that the President of the Republic should not care if either unconstitutional provisions or regulations are passed which abolish the separation of powers? Is this the arrangement they have made with the presidential candidate they are supporting in the forthcoming elections? In other words, to be indifferent to unconstitutional legislative proposals which AKEL will support electorally?
As regards the substance of the issue, which directly concerns the many teacher candidates on the appointment lists ("appointees" and "eligible for appointment"), any safeguarding of "employment rights for an indefinite period of time" is not offered as a solution. Regardless of whether this should be done following any court decisions, a permanent and lasting solution is needed.
It is known that the Ministry of Education, Sports and Youth (MESY) is thoroughly examining this issue - which has large dimensions - in order to provide solutions that will both serve the well-intentioned interests of education and guarantee the professional security of teachers. The proposed solutions will be made public shortly.
But is AKEL's attitude sincere or is it an opportunistic populist position?
If its attitude was sincere, then why was AKEL the only political party to react strongly when, on one occasion two months ago, at the beginning of the school year, the Ministry of Education and Culture replaced contracts for the purchase of services with teacher appointments? Why did AKEL react then, defending the purchase of services! It showed how hypocritical their attitude is.
In order not to forget what issues we are talking about, the large number of service purchase contracts, which arose together with the need for rapid and flexible development of new programmes of the Ministry, has its origins in those "stone years", when AKEL's policies applied in governance had led to the state's coffers not even having the resources to pay the salaries of civil servants for more than a couple of months.
In any case, the Ministry of National Economy is at this very moment working on ways to replace the temporary provision of services and the creation of "open-ended" relationships with regular recruitment procedures.
It is true that for reasons of rapid and flexible development of new programmes in recent years there has been a significant number
of service purchase contracts in the Ministry of National Economy. However, AKEL is the last to be able to talk about such matters. Because it is known that the whole issue is being examined and global solutions will be provided for the service purchase projects concerning the Ministry of National Economy.
IP
Contents of this article including associated images are belongs PIO
Views & opinions expressed are those of the author and/or PIO
Source
Source[/URL][/P]
