Akash Samaroo
Lead Editor-Politics
akash.samaroo@cnc3.co.tt
Defence Minister Wayne Sturge says the Military-Led Academic Training (MiLAT) Programme has not been closed but temporarily suspended as the Government reviews its financial viability.
His statement comes amid mounting criticism that the move could leave vulnerable young men without a critical support system.
The programme’s suspension has sparked concern over the future of almost 200 trainees and approximately 50 staff members, with reports that facilitators have received termination notices.
Responding to questions from Guardian Media yesterday, Sturge insisted the programme remained under review.
“The programme has not been shut down but temporarily suspended,” he said.
Sturge said the Government was engaged in discussions with the Trinidad and Tobago Defence Force Reserves and the Ministry of Tertiary Education to determine the programme’s future.
“We are in ongoing discussions with TTDF Reserves as well as Minister of Tertiary Education with a view to restructuring the programme as it is not economically viable in its present form.”
He said the Government hoped to complete the restructuring quickly.
“We hope to restructure in the shortest possible time so as to facilitate the remaining Form 4 cohort.”
Asked what the restructuring would involve, including whether there would be a smaller intake, fewer teachers, how soon the programme would resume, and whether it would continue under the MiLAT name, Sturge declined to provide specifics.
“All of these questions will be answered closer to the end of July,” he said.
He was also asked what happens in the interim to the students who took up residence at the facility’s Mausica Road compound, but he did not respond.
Sturge, however, rejected Opposition claims that suspending the programme would contribute to rising crime.
“The narrative that closure of the programme may lead to an increase in crime and criminality is a trademark scare tactic of the Opposition,” he said.
He argued that despite MiLAT’s existence, T&T experienced record levels of violent crime over the past decade.
“This programme has been in place for some time now, yet we saw unprecedented increases in violent crime, particularly record murder rates in the last 10 years. We understand the value of such programmes, but we do not subscribe to the hype created by the Opposition.”
Established in 2007, MiLAT is a residential social intervention programme designed for at-risk youth aged 16 to 20. Operating in a structured, quasi-military environment, it combines behavioural development with academic instruction, preparing participants for Caribbean Secondary Education Certificate (CSEC) examinations and vocational training.
The programme received a budget allocation of $27.4 million in the 2024/2025 fiscal year. That allocation fell to $18.7 million in the 2025/2026 Estimates of Expenditure.
Former Technical Coordinator at the Ministry of Youth Development and National Service, Kobe Sandy, warned that the suspension was already affecting trainees.
He said more than 100 Level One trainees who had been preparing to sit CSEC examinations next year had been sent home following the termination of staff contracts.
Sandy said many of the young men would now be forced back into the difficult environments from which they had sought refuge through the programme, placing years of rehabilitation, education and personal development at risk.
Former Youth Development and National Service Minister Foster Cummings also criticised the decision, describing it as part of what he called a broader dismantling of youth development initiatives.
He said MiLAT had helped many young men who entered the programme without academic qualifications to leave with five or six CSEC passes, arguing it addressed one of the root causes of crime by targeting young people who were neither employed nor engaged in education or training.
Laventille East/Morvant MP Christian Birchwood also criticised the suspension, saying MiLAT had provided at-risk youth with a pathway into skilled employment.
While acknowledging that governments were entitled to pursue different policy priorities, Birchwood questioned what alternative would replace the programme.
He warned that removing such initiatives without a transitional plan could leave vulnerable young people with fewer opportunities and ultimately contribute to higher levels of youth unemployment and criminality.
