MEMBERS of Parliament’s Public Administration and Appropriations Committee (PAAC) were left perplexed on Wednesday after officials revealed that only 23 per cent of the Government’s $1-billion Solidarity Programme had been spent nearly a year after its launch.

The disclosure triggered concern among members of the committee, particularly against the backdrop of continuing economic hardship and growing complaints from constituents who had expected assistance under the programme.

The Solidarity Programme was announced in June 2025 as a $1-billion emergency social intervention aimed at assisting vulnerable Jamaicans including elderly persons; low-income informal workers; persons with disabilities; and young adults between 18 and 35 who were not employed, in school or receiving training.

Acting permanent secretary in the Ministry of Labour and Social Security, Dione Jennings disclosed that the programme received more than 18,000 applications but only 11,521 persons were approved for payments totalling approximately $230.42 million.

That figure represents just over 23 per cent of the programme’s original allocation, meaning approximately $769.58 million remain unused.

She also disclosed that not all approved beneficiaries had collected their payments, with the payment period now extended to June 30, 2026.

Jennings told the committee that unspent funds were returned once the financial year ended, to reduce debt.

The revelation drew a sharp reaction from committee members, particularly Member of Parliament (MP) for St Catherine South Eastern Dr Alfred Dawes, who questioned how such a large sum could remain untouched while vulnerable Jamaicans continued struggling.

“We’re just coming from, we’re still reeling from the revelation that there’s $1.4 billion of donor aid barely spent, and now we are being informed that there is $770 million unspent, earmarked for the most vulnerable in our society. Something about the conceptualisation of this programme was wrong from the outset,” Dawes said.

He argued that the programme had clearly failed to reach many of the people it was intended to assist.

“If people are suffering and we are sitting on $770 million dollars that just went back into the Consolidated Fund or for debt payments, something has to be done about this programme. It’s clearly not working. The persons who it is meant to help, they’re not receiving the help, and the money is just sitting there,” Dawes added.

PAAC Chairman Peter Bunting also raised concerns about the programme’s eligibility requirements, revealing that many persons who attended registration drives in his constituency office believed they qualified but were later deemed ineligible.

“The response was overwhelming, but it turned out that many persons who showed up didn’t understand the criteria. For example, there were a number of persons, [for example] students who were attending tertiary institutions, and that was a disqualification,” Bunting said.

Bunting questioned why tertiary students facing financial hardship were excluded from the programme despite the large amount of unused funds.

“Maybe the criteria could have been loosened somewhat to allow the full use of the $1 billion, because people who were genuinely in need — you know, even to continue in tertiary education — seem to have been disqualified just by virtue of the fact that they were enrolled at a tertiary institution,” he argued.

Jennings defended the programme’s structure, insisting that the initiative was intentionally designed to target persons who were often excluded from existing support systems.

“That’s why we didn’t broaden it to include some of these groups that you’re making mention of, because we’re trying to reach those who would normally not be considered for the programmes,” she told the committee.

She explained that the ministry was specifically targeting people who were not already benefiting from programmes such as Programme of Advancement Through Health and Education (PATH), the National Insurance Scheme, or the Social Pension Programme.

She also outlined how approved applicants were being referred to other State agencies and programmes based on their needs. According to Jennings, 90 persons were referred to the Registrar General’s Department for birth certificate issues, more than 9,800 low-income informal workers were referred to HEART/NSTA Trust and labour market systems, while persons with disabilities and medically vulnerable applicants were directed to specialised support agencies.

However, MP for St Mary Central Omar Newell suggested that the programme may have failed to account for vulnerable persons who were trying to improve their circumstances but still required temporary assistance.

“I’m not clear that the range of programmes properly account for somebody who is trying to drag themselves up out of the gutter, so to speak, and needs that additional help, just that additional assistance to go through,” Newell said.

“The idea that someone in school has additional knowledge in terms of programmes is not always so, because all of us might be able to relate to the fact that people come in our office daily, weekly, enquiring on things that we would have thought that they should have known about,” he added.

Despite the concerns raised, Jennings insisted that the ministry still considers the targeted group a priority, and indicated that lessons from the programme would help shape future interventions.

Chair of the PAAC Peter Bunting speaks during Wednesday’s sitting of the committee during which lawmakers questioned the eligibility criteria and low disbursement rate under the Government’s Solidarity Programme. 

Member of Parliament for St Catherine South Eastern Dr Alfred Dawes raises concerns during Wednesday’s PAAC meeting, after officials disclosed that roughly $770 million from the Solidarity Programme is still unspent.

Member of Parliament for St Mary Central Omar Newell contributes to discussions at Wednesday’s PAAC meeting.