Finally, according to Kidzu ,“the committee in its report stated among other things that over 4,469 names had found their way into the nominal rolls of the 18 local governments.” Rubbing it in, Kidzu, who doubles as a special assistant in Duke’s cabinet, stated further that, “of this number, only about 200 were engaged in any form (while) others consisted of children in schools or university, the aged and ghosts whose salaries ended up in people’s pockets.”  Not done yet, he said “employment letters were hawked at various sums in different local government areas ranging between N5,000 - N10,000. In attempting to calm frayed nerves, Kidzu promised government’s intention of “using scientific method” in affording job opportunities to those who have been kicked out of their places of livelihood. Quite interesting.

But how do you apply science in creating jobs for people who have been declared ghosts or  spirits?  If they actually existed, why tag them ghosts? The public will no doubt be fastidious on the allegation that employment letters were hawked at various sums in different local governments. Who were those who bought the forms - the ghosts? The affected were quick to puncture this claim when viewed from the allegation that those names found in the pay voucher were those of children in schools, the aged and ghosts.” How were these children able to afford N10,000 to buy employment forms? If the salaries ended up in people pockets, did these beneficiaries pay themselves the money to acquire the forms which they hawked? 

There are more questions than answers. One thing the government did not tell us was the recommendation of the panel of enquiry it set up to wipe the cloud shielding the truth about the employment. But Sunday Vanguard has it on good authority that the panel advised against retrenchment of the workers. Speaking on the issue, the president of the Cross River State Union of Local Government, Mr. Bassey Bassey Okosin, said government acted against the recommendation of the panel. This means that the government did not recognize even the views of those it assembled to sort out problem. Consequently, it can be safely said that the panel was set up by government to take inventory of those employed for summary sack, the circumstances and reason of employment not being relevant. To display their anger over the sack, the leaders of  the union in the 18 councils met and warned of an impending industrial unrest in that sector if the workers were not recalled by the end of March 2004. This is a pointer to the fact that the workers exist as humans and not as ghosts as Duke wants people to believe. Another pertinent question is why government chose to heap the blame of the employment on the transition committee chairmen in those councils. It will be inconceivable for anyone to reason through any stretch of imagination that 4,469 names could be added to the payroll of the councils without the knowledge of the powers that be at the local government service commission and the ministry of local government.

 In fact, it will be easier to convince the Pope to disbelieve Christ's resurrection the third day than it will be to convince the public that the chairmen acted alone. If this is proven otherwise, then the two parastatals have questions to answer for not being abreast with happenings in the councils which they supervise. Okosin also drew attention to the fact that the sacking of such a huge number of people amounted to talking from both sides of the mouth. This is because “it beats one’s imagination that a government that promised to provide 500,000 jobs during its tenure would turn round to sack over 4,000 workers in one fell swoop without betting an eyelid”.

Pundits are of the view that though there may be plenty of irregularities in the employment saga, a mass sack is certainly not the answer. It was reasoned that government should have sieved through the mix-up and removed those names seen to have been smuggled into the payroll through the back door. Observers also believe that rather than throw them back into the labour market, the sacked men and women should have been absorbed into the various agricultural programmes of the state. The tale about the arrears of salary in the councils is worthy of mention. There is no doubt that some past elected politicians were not prudent, leading to accumulation of salary back log, but political watchers are quick to ask the state government to disclose how it spends the excess of monies accruing to the various councils after payment of salaries by it.

Before now, the councils had a crowd of political appointees, such as supervisory councilors and their retinue of personal aides. So were the chairmen with their numerous attaches, not forgetting the councilors too.
But, the scenario is different in the current dispensation. What happened to the money hitherto collected as salaries and benefits of these erstwhile political jobbers? We have it on good authority that only N500,000 is availed each council as running cost after salaries would have been paid. So, what happens to the rest? Observers believe that this money could have made the difference as salaries for those who have been sacked. Pundits also think that if the government is reasonably convinced that fraud had been perpetuated in these councils, then those involved should have been guests of the Justice Mustapha Akanbi corrupt practices commission by now.

Anything short of this will amount to aiding and abetting inappropriate employments. Much as illegality must not be condoned, the recent blanket sack was an exercise in bad taste. Duke constantly talks about poverty eradication but his recent action amounts to poverty implantation. In Cross River State, there are no industries or factories to employ job seekers, the only avenue available for the people is government. So if the government turns its back on the people, they have only two options to turn to and that is to perish with poverty or take to crime.

There is no doubt that government has a social responsibility of providing jobs for the people. To say that Duke had brushed up the state in terms of development is stating the obvious. However, beautiful cities do not replace hunger because hunger blurs the sight of the hungry. Walking on roads made of marble compares to suffering in the midst of plenty.
Observers argue that there haven’t been any mass quality employment in the civil service or other sectors of the economy in the last five years. What has only been witnessed is the employment of some illiterate and poverty stricken women who sweep the streets of Calabar, and other urban cities in the state. However, if the government considers this type of employment as only suitable jobs for the  people, we implore it to rethink its policy in this regard and employ those sacked workers in the interest of justice, equity and fair play.

The intriguing aspect of the entire event is the publicity stunt injected into the drama. To this end, some contract seeking individuals in the state have resorted to taking their turn to praise the government for sacking those young men and women. These busy-bodies appear on the state television, condemning those who provided employment for these Cross River children, without proffering any solution to the problem. Methinks that the government should set up another committee to sift the grain from the chaff as a way of recalling the qualified, which include university graduates, so that the system does not end up breeding a disenchanted populace.