Bulgarian rulers have been deluding themselves for years that with strategies for temporary jobs and the billions from the Europe’s funds they can solve the unemployment problems automatically. But some of the money under the Operational Programme Human Resources Development flowed in the institutions, municipalities and companies, while unemployed people continued to queue up at the labour offices. It is just that the previous government (and not only it), the state administration of a lower level and the Employment Agency were too unprepared to manage complex and difficult projects in order to move ahead a little economy.
A prime example of how the road to hell may be paved with good intentions and bureaucratic obstacles is the scheme Development under Priority Axis 1 – Promotion of economic activity and development of the labour market. The project on Human Resources Development with a budget of 260 million levs was supposed to be completed by the employment agency by the end of this year, but for various reasons was extended until the end of 2014. The Supreme Audit Office made an audit of its implementation in the period 2010-2012 with an overall positive judgment, but between the lines it formulated why we fail with the implementation of operational programmes.
First, the Development Programme as well as a number of other schemes of the labour market as an indicator of implementation do not require job retention after completion of the programme. In other words, the Employment Agency hailed its success that 53,000 unemployed have had temporary jobs and some 59,000 people with primary or lower secondary education have received some vocational training. But these same people after another month still register as unemployed because they had subsequently been abandoned to cope on their own. A project can not be successful, since between March 2010 and December 2012 there were 18 changes to its main features, its budget floated between 180 million and 260 million levs, and the number of those included in training differed. Another question is how is this project written and why instead of being interesting to employers in the real sector, it is becoming the preferred one for municipalities and regional administrations. That is, the state has paid for its own employment. Ultimately, never did it reach the estimated costs, and the measures (not) taken to promote the project condemn it to failure. It is absurd if the video clip for its presentation is made a year after the release of the money, while leaflets and other advertising materials were printed only in 2012.
Furthermore, the cost of financing the jobs created by employers in the public sector are reimbursed in full, while businesses receive only half of their investments back.
The BANKER
