Raising work permit fees is a sound idea that should not be difficult to execute. Unfortunately, the government is still struggling to get it right.
In December, an order was Gazetted to enact a complex system that would have set fees based on professions. As we noted at the time, that scheme was needlessly complicated and almost certainly unmanageable for a Labour Department that already struggles to process applications in a timely manner.
Fortunately, that plan appears to have been abandoned: Last week Dr. Pickering announced that government had decided instead to implement another system, which uses a sliding scale to levy fees based on income. This scheme is much simpler and makes a lot more sense.
However, it will bring a dramatic change for many work-permit holders. Though lower earners won’t be drastically affected, mid-range earners will see a significant increase, expatriates earning more than $50,000 annually will pay at least twice as much as they pay now, and the highest earners will see their fees increase tenfold.
By and large, this system seems fairly reasonable. An increase is certainly in order given that the existing fees have been in place since 1981, and the proposed regime will up taxes more for the workers who can best afford to pay.
However, there are two problems.
The first is the lack of sufficient lead time: Dr. Pickering’s April 18 announcement disclosed that the system would take effect on May 15, giving the community less than a month to prepare.
The second is the government’s failure to invite public discussion before taking a decision on the way forward.
Though Dr. Pickering said that leaders had consulted with stakeholders in various industries, this is not good enough. Who were these stakeholders? Why were they privileged above others to help guide public policy? Why wasn’t everyone else given a chance to comment?
Not surprisingly, Dr. Pickering is already backpedalling. He said last Thursday that he had been hearing complaints, and he assured the public that government would take this input into consideration.
But as we argued in January, the new system should be implemented only after government holds public consultations that give the entire community a chance to weigh in. Then the new system should be phased in over time, with plenty of warning so that everyone affected will be able to plan ahead.
In recent years, the government has promised repeatedly to support businesses, and it has taken some steps in that direction. But unilaterally implementing this new regime with insufficient warning and no public dialogue will spark bad feelings — and it could chill business in ways that government might not even have considered.
No wonder people are complaining.
{fcomment}