As the latest laureates bathe in public acclaim, it may seem inelegant to question the current scheme. However, apart from some tinkering, it runs on from year to year, the concept set in stone, like religious beliefs, untouchable – even if not targeted at Dalits. People seems to have forgotten the system was designed to send the best brains abroad, before universities sprouted here like mushrooms, so that they could return home afterwards to help the country. It’s like the trees in Vandermeersch Street. Lovely though they are, the residents prefer to forget they were only planted when the old railway line was abandoned, making it a rather sensible route for its replacement.

They may have little idea as well who Jacob van der Meersch was. The word laureate comes from the laurel crowns adorning the winners of the Pythian Games. In fact, at Olympia, there were no laurels – the crowns were made from olive leaves. There were several events but only one winner per race, as only winning counted – there was no record of who came second. The winning athletes were feted, their achievements chronicled to inspire future generations. There was just the glory of excelling, although a victor at Olympia was allowed to set up a statue of himself. If Mauritius had statues of its laureates, at least their names wouldn’t be forgotten. Admittedly, however, there were material rewards at other festivals and even Olympic winners subsequently received advantages.

What people thought and did in the past shouldn’t dictate the present but act as a guide – or warning. There are pros and cons to the current laureate system. It does encourage aspiration and the creation of a valid elite, which Leninist thinking did so much to destroy in the 20th century. There’s nothing wrong with an elite – providing it’s not static. But does it make sense to spend hundreds of thousands of rupees every year on the top youngsters?

Today’s laureates believe the award is a purely personal one. Imagine how Athenians would have reacted to a laureate migrating to Sparta! Isn’t it time to turn the scholarships into loans, repayable unless the scholars who go abroad return to work here? And for the government to establish a mechanism to ensure they have a job. At present, the state does nothing to help laureates gain appropriate employment after graduation, not even in the public sector where established bureaucrats wet themselves at the mere thought of anyone brighter and more competent than them entering the service.

It was bourgeois parents who persuaded a former government to abandon the conditionality requirements, perhaps in the hope parents would make a little contribution to a party’s obscure funding. Most laureates used to come from families who were well-off, but why should the children of rich parents get a full scholarship? Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to offer only partial scholarships except for those who really need full support?

Are the most admirable schools the laureate factories or rather those that achieve the highest percentage of HSC passes? Isn’t that worthy of headlines? And some of them are private colleges, likely to be omitted from the latest regional proposals. No government dares to pans andéor bwat, kouma nou dir – and rethink the whole scholarship system. Real and sensible change might unfortunately unleash a wave of criticism. After all, it offers even better odds than the national lottery. To make everyone happy, perhaps the Loto and the Laureate Scheme should somehow be merged….

Yours sincerely
Epi PHRON