Building a Bermuda Policy to Reduce the Number of At-Risk Children Joining Gangs
Part A
Identifying the at-risk children
There are numerous factors that may contribute to a young man’s decision to join a gang, and these
factors often vary case by case, but four factors in particular appear to have a high correlation among
gang members in Bermuda (as confirmed by a number of Bermuda social workers, teachers and police
officers, and consistent with similar findings in the UK and US):
Young men who join gangs in Bermuda are likely to
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
be from low-income, single-parent homes,
have received minimal or no economic or emotional support from their fathers (absentee
fathers),
have done poorly in school (often because parents failed to participate in their education or
learning disorders were not properly diagnosed) and
often have had minimal community involvement (sports teams, church, social clubs).
With little sense of belonging to family or community, these young men fulfill that need through gang
membership.
Part B Policy Objectives to reduce the number of children at-risk of joining gangs
Using the above four correlatives as a starting point, we can identify the following objectives of a
Bermuda Policy to reduce the number of children at-risk of joining gangs:
1. The Policy should discourage men from fathering children if they are not prepared to provide the
financial and emotional support needed to properly raise that child;
2. The Policy should provide a viable legal means to ensure that fathers provide the necessary financial
support for their children;
3. The Policy should provide incentives for fathers to spend more time with their children and to
increase the child’s community involvement;
4. The Policy should seek to increase the upward mobility of low-income families, in particular by
improving public education and providing financial assistance for post-secondary education.
5. The Policy should provide incentives for parents to learn more about how they can be better parents
and become more involved in their children’s education;
Since Bermuda’s national debt is significant, and therefore Government is unlikely to enact a policy that
requires substantial government funding, each potential program should be evaluated on the basis of
both how much it costs and how effectively it will reduce the four factors that strongly correlate with atrisk children joining gangs.
3. Some suggested programs
Program 1
A Program to reduce the problem of low income, single-parent homes with minimal father input at
minimal cost to the government
The frequency and depth of the first two correlatives (boys who grow up in low-income, single-parent
homes with minimal father input) can be dramatically reduced by implementing a program that (i)
assists single moms to collect delinquent child-support payments from fathers who contribute neither
money nor time toward their children’s upbringing and (ii) encourages these fathers to spend more time
with their children.
Under our present legal system, a mother seeking to obtain child-support payments must go to Court to
obtain a judgment ordering the father to make those payments. When the father simply refuses to pay,
the mother then must go back to court for a garnishment order that must be served upon the father’s
employer ordering that company to deduct support payments from the father’s salary. This may sound
like a good system—and sometimes it works—but far too often these fathers simply change jobs,
thereby forcing the mom to start all over again. With limited time and finances the mother often has
little choice but to give up her quest for child support. The result is a mother who has to work longer
hours to pay the rent and put food on the table, thereby leaving even less time for her to properly
nurture her child by (i) instilling in him proper moral principles, (ii) providing help and guidance with his
education (particularly in the early formative years) and (iii) giving him a sense of belonging that comes
from strong family and community involvement.
We can improve this inefficient and ineffective system by implementing a program under which
government (i) helps single moms obtain the required court order against delinquent fathers and (ii)
registers the garnishment order on a computerized national registry that constitutes continuous notice
to all Bermuda employers. Under this system the father will no longer be able to avoid payment merely
by changing jobs because registration on the national registry will constitute continuous notice to all
Bermuda employers, both at the time of registration and in the future.
It works like this. Prior to paying salaries, each company will be required to enter the social security
number of all their employees into a computerized national registry system. This may sound like a large
task, but it really just requires a one-time input of employees' social security numbers, and thereafter it
takes only one computer click to receive a computerized response. Any moneys owing under a
garnishment order will be deducted from the delinquent father's pay-cheque and remitted to the single
mom. The program will not only provide much needed assistance to struggling moms, but it will
dramatically lower government expenditures on housing and other social assistance programs, thereby
lowering the national debt.
But there is even more that we can do, and it is this second part of the program that is most important.
Once it becomes clear to fathers that they can’t escape responsibility for child-support payments, the
program can allow for a negotiated reduction in payments in exchange for the father spending more
time with his children. For instance, the original garnishment order can be for an amount equal to, say,
30% of the father’s salary, with provision that it be lowered to a lesser amount, say, 20% if the father
agrees to certain conditions such as (i) spending at least 8 hours a week helping his children with their
homework and playing with them at a community centre (like the Sandys 360 Centre or the Aquarium)
or coaching their soccer or cricket teams and (ii) taking a parenting course to learn how to best nurture
his children and help them with their educational endeavors.
What are the benefits of such a program? The implementation of this National Garnishment
Registration System will (i) increase the income level of single-parent families, (ii) reduce the need for
single-parent moms to work a second job, thereby increasing the time mothers can spend nurturing
their children and helping them with homework, (iii) increase the time fathers spend nurturing their
children and helping them with homework, (iv) increase parent and child involvement in community
activities, and (v) discourage men from fathering children when they are not prepared to provide the
necessary financial and emotional support. These five outcomes should dramatically reduce the number
of at-risk children becoming involved with gangs, and the program can be implemented with minimal
cost to the government. Consequently, on a cost/benefit basis, this program ranks extremely high.
Program 2
Combining food and shelter programs with family education programs
Bermuda spends tens of millions of dollars each year on social programs to help the disadvantaged.
These programs are important. They provide the social safety net that allows struggling Bermuda
families to pay their rent and put food on the table. But the ugly truth is that many of these families are
immersed in generational dysfunction that they don’t have the tools to fix. They were born into
dysfunction and they will give birth and raise their children in dysfunction because that’s the only pool
of experience from which they can draw upon to deal with the problems they face.
The Bermuda government, charities and social agencies have numerous programs to help these families
develop the life-skills needed to turn their lives around, but unfortunately many of these families don’t
take advantage of these programs. In many cases they are so immersed in dysfunction that they can’t
see that these programs can help them and their children build a better future. In other words, from
their perspective, there is no incentive to take these life-skills programs and so they don’t—or if they do,
they do so only half-heartedly.
The Bermuda government can change this. They can go through every single social assistance program
they fund and, wherever possible, restructure it to provide incentives for education and life-skills
improvements. And they can do all this without spending one dollar more than they presently do.
For instance, the Bermuda Housing Corporation provides rent subsidies to needy families so that they
can pay their rent, and in return we as a society receive the satisfaction that we take care of our needy.
But we can obtain a much bigger social return on our money simply by making part of the rent subsidy
dependent on the recipients taking any number of life-skills programs or high school completion
courses.
For instance, instead of paying an unemployed, single-parent mom $1,500 a month in rent subsidy, the
government can pay her only $1,000 but offer to pay another $500 if she enrols in a parenting-skills
class that teaches the importance of reading to your child every day, providing him with nourishing,
affordable meals and singing songs or telling them stories to help them develop their vocabulary and
imagination. (The list of skills is long and varied and can extend right through the teen years.)
Each of these subsidy programs can meaningfully help people improve their lives provided they are
structured properly. The key to the success of these integrated social programs is to find out what each
recipient needs to do to change his or her life around, and then to use a meaningful part of the financial
subsidy as an incentive for them to take the steps needed to make that change. The increased cost to
government is zero. The increased benefit to both the individual and society is unlimited.
Consequently, on a cost benefit basis, this program ranks extremely high.
Program 3.
Decreasing housing costs by changing the way housing allowances are structured
The largest single expense to Bermudian families is housing, and so one of the most effective ways to
help struggling families is to reduce their rent. Fortunately, there is a very simply way to lower rents in
Bermuda—change the way corporate housing allowances are structured so that they no longer
artificially increase rents.
At present, the typical employee housing allowance is structured in a way that removes or reduces the
recipient's incentive to bargain for a lower rent. For lack of a better term, I will call these allowances the
"You Lose What You Don't Use" housing allowances and I will illustrate the problem by example.
A landlord is asking $6,000/month for a three-bedroom house. There are three persons interested in
renting, one of which has a housing allowance for, say, $8,000/month. Two of the potential renters
increase their offers to $6,300 and $6,500, respectively, but the subsidized employee simply shuts them
all out by offering $8,000. Since the employee would forfeit back to his employer any amount of the
allowance not used for rent, he has no vested economic incentive to negotiate a rent for an amount less
than his $8,000 limit. The result—artificially inflated rents that flow right through the entire housing
market. Everyone pays higher rents.
The problem gets worse. Not only did "You Lose What You Don't Use" housing allowances artificially
inflate rents when housing was scarce, but they are slowing down the decrease in rents now that
housing is abundant. Again, an example to illustrate the point. A friend of mine receives a
$10,000/month housing allowance. His landlord, aware that rents have fallen, offered to reduce his rent
below $10,000 so not to lose a good tenant. My friend (proving himself an exceptionally good tenant)
turned down the offer. "It's not necessary," he told his landlord, "I have a housing allowance that covers
the full rent as it is."
The solution is an easy one—structure housing allowances so that they give employees a vested
economic interest in lower rents.
If companies granted only non-refundable housing allowances (we give you the housing allowance in
cash and you decide how you spend it) instead of "You Lose What You Don't Use" housing allowances,
the employee would then have an incentive to negotiate in good faith for the lowest rent he could get.
The result would be more affordable housing throughout the Bermuda market (which not only helps out
low-income families but also reduces the living costs of other Bermudians such as those in the
hospitality and tourism industries which decreases Bermuda tourism/retail costs and makes us more
competitive with other jurisdictions).
The increased cost to government for this program is zero while the increased benefit to low-income
families and the rest of Bermuda is substantial. Consequently, on a cost benefit basis, this program
ranks extremely high. The one caveat to this program is that lower rents will help the have-nots but will
reduce rents for landlords, many of whom are in overstretched financial positions. As such, the policy
requires a decision to be made—who do we most want to help: the struggling poor or the struggling
middle and upper classes?
Program 4
Improving education by increasing parental involvement
Study after study has consistently shown that the number one factor in determining how well a child will
do in school is not income or social status (it doesn’t matter if you are black, white, Asian, Hispanic, rich
or poor). Active parental involvement in a child’s education is the most accurate predictor of a
student’s achievement in school—attending school regularly, earning higher grades, passing their
classes, graduating senior school and going on to obtain a postsecondary education. I’ve yet to meet a
teacher that didn’t wholeheartedly agree with this statement. Children will perform significantly better
when their parents are actively involved in their education. So what can be done to encourage parents
to do more?
The attached document, “Proposal to Facilitate Effective Parental Involvement in Children's Education,”
advocates the implementation of a three-part program to increase the number one determinant in
children’s education success.
Program 5
Replacing bad teachers with good
In the Bermuda public school system we have good teachers, mediocre teachers and bad teachers. With
training, some of these mediocre teachers may become good teachers, but no amount of training can
convert bad teachers into good.
For the sake of Bermudian children in our public school system, the problem of bad teachers has to be
fixed. Studies have shown that if a child has a bad teacher for just one year, it will take that child one
and a half years to catch up. And if the child has a bad teacher for a second year, he not only is unlikely
to ever catch up, but he is also much more likely to drop out before completing high school and his
chances of joining a gang and becoming involved in criminal activities increase substantially.
Bad teaching not only destroys lives, it perpetuates the cycle of poverty and dysfunction that prevents
lower to middle class mobility—a key component to social stability, lower crime and more equitable
income distribution between the races. In other words, bad teaching prevents all the good things that
good public education can achieve.
We can dramatically improve public education if we can simply remove the five worst teachers from
every school and replace them with excellent teachers. But there are two very large barriers in in our
way:
1. The Bermuda Union of Teachers is required to protect all teachers, including bad teachers, from
termination. Remember, the role of the BUT is not to improve teaching—that is the role of government.
The BUT’s role is to protect the jobs of teachers even when those teachers are bad teachers.
2. Because it is critically important that Bermudians all work together to solve their common problems,
the government should do its best to not simply fire government workers—even bad teachers—but
instead help them find other employment, which may be difficult in our weakened economy.
So how do we get out of this mess? How do we (i) get rid of bad teachers that are destroying our
children’s lives, (ii) replace them with excellent teachers, and (iii) find some other employment for the
terminated teachers?
A solution can be found by looking at the needs of two different groups of people with two unrelated
problems to find a workable solution for both.
So let’s travel up to 30,000 feet to look at an unrelated problem—the high cost of operating a business
in Bermuda.
Over the last ten years, International Business has seen their average annual employee costs more than
double as a result of higher wages, higher pension and health-care costs and, in particular, higher payroll
taxes, which now stand at 14%. As a result, these companies have been directing more of their work
away from Bermuda to lower cost jurisdictions, which has meant less jobs for Bermudians, lower tax
revenue for government and lower sales for retailers, restaurants, taxi drivers and other local
businesses.
So here’s how the government can deal with the problem. They can set up a program under which
companies agree to hire former teachers and in return the government agrees to give those
participating companies a reduction in their payroll tax. The exact amount of the reduction will depend
on the number of ex-teachers a company hires and the additional terms of the program can be
negotiated between government and the business sector, but might look something like the following.
For every teacher a company hires, it can be exempt from paying payroll tax for an amount equal to
double his applicable payroll tax, effectively making both the ex-teacher and another employee exempt.
The teacher will be paid at his former teacher’s wage and will be trained on the job for two years. At the
end of two years’ probation, the employer can then decide whether to continue his employment
permanently. Under such a structure, ex-teachers who are offered continued employment will have the
opportunity to possibly make far more than they ever could as teachers.
Keep in mind that even though someone is a bad teacher doesn’t mean he will be bad at his new job in
business. Many of these teachers have Masters Degrees and PHDs and may shine at jobs that require a
different skillset than classroom management.
Some of these bad teachers may need a nudge out the door. This might be done by announcing that
government will start publishing the assessment scores that teachers receive each year. Let’s face it,
parents should have the right to know if their children are about to be subjected to a year of bad
teaching that may ruin their lives.
By addressing the needs of two key parts of Bermuda society—Business and Education—we can develop
policies that can make all Bermudians better off. And remember, every day that government avoids
implementing a program to get rid of bad teachers is another day that they are choosing to support the
interests of bad teachers over the interests of young children whose lives may be destroyed.
(Note, this program to move bad teachers into the private sector can be extended to also include many
other government employees, particularly white-collar educated employees, thereby allowing
government to make the required large cuts in government expenditures to regain control over its
ballooning national debt.)
Kevin Comeau
January 2012