(continuation)
Nevertheless, and in some quarters, arguments are being made that the Government may well be ‘mashing the crease’ with respect to its treaty obligations and commitments to the RTC Establishing the CSME, and in relation to international conventions for which the country is a signatory. For instance, Article 45 of the RTC declares that “Member States commit themselves to the goal of free movement of their nationals within the Community.” The international conventions generally speak to humane treatment and dignity, basic and inalienable human rights, and procedural considerations for the ‘expulsion’ of non-citizens.
For the most part and without the Government providing empirical data to support its move, the implementation of the ‘amnesty’ rests on a greater reliance of the popular support that the Prime Minister and his administration receives from an emotive public. Accompanying ignorance and misinformation there is a garrulous in defence of Barbados’ accumulated spoils (i.e. social services and benefits, quality of life, and general stability in terms of currency and socio-political civility) against ‘unwanted’ and undocumented immigrants from within CARICOM.
The Barbados Auditor General’s Report of 2008 notes that:
The lack of adequate monitoring of, and enforcement action against, persons who overstayed their visit, has led to a growing but unknown number of persons who remain in Barbados without the permission of the Immigration Department. This includes non-nationals whose applications for work permits, extensions and visas were unsuccessful.
This represents an indictment on the administrative system; it does not discredit the value of the immigration officers in the course of their duties. Indeed, it is later cited in the report that “lack of timely information has hampered the Investigation Section in carrying out its mandate effectively. In addition, the number of officers attached to this unit is insufficient and should be increased.” The Prime Minister himself has corroborated the inadequacies associated with this important agency through which Barbadians ought to feel that their collective security is not compromised.
So what does the Prime Minister do in response to the problem of illegal immigration and particularly in its manifestation from CARCOM Member State (s)? Without necessary and urgent reform to the Immigration Department, Barbados decides that the best way to manage migration is to offer an amnesty that effectively excludes many undocumented migrants currently living/working in Barbados. I contend that it is correct to manage immigration as much as it is a responsibility for the administration to be clear in reflecting policies that are grounded with a long-term strategic objective.
In Barbados we hold to principles of democracy, social justice, and several liberal tenets that promote freedoms. In conjunction with these rudiments, we operate willingly inside the bounds of an agreed spirit of CARICOM as inscribed within the RTC. If Barbados is moving away from this position, it should be lucidly communicated to publics in Barbados and CARICOM.
Economics play a pivotal role in terms of labour markets; however CARICOM Member States have expressed in existentialist terms the need and commitment for functional cooperation and harmonisation of policies. Have we in Barbados assumed incorrectly that a common legacy of colonialism will overturn the need for programmes that socially integrate people who are psycho-socially and economically disconnected and conditioned to see difference and fragmentation?
Leading researchers note that a major hindrance for migrants is derailment by way of ‘guarantees of security and human dignity’ by receiving countries. It is logical therefore to reason that if persons are residing as undocumented immigrants there is greater likelihood for these to experience exploitation and a subversion of any rights and often they go underground to avoid detection from authorities. Against this background, should Barbados not therefore seek to implement ‘integrating mechanisms’ that would better position its agencies for the management of migration? Should Barbados be contemplating ‘guest worker’ programmes whereby rights can be accorded in keeping with the moral and ethical sensitivity deserving to its Community Member States in contradistinction to immigrants from ‘Third Countries’ that sit outside of the arrangements and spirit of CARICOM?
Given the provisions of Article 189 whereby “a dispute arises between Member States” should Barbados not be moving more towards “a mode of settlement” by discussing the matter forthrightly with the Heads of Government in the offending states? Barbados’ leadership in CARIFTA, CARICOM, and the CSME places it in the fortunate position of demonstrating its commitment to Caribbean unity that is so vital to the security of the region.
We must never forget the words of the Right Excellent Errol W. Barrow. In 1986 the National Hero of Barbados put forward a case for the collectives in the Caribbean to be tolerant as well as to recognise the bonds that are fundamental to our progress.
If we have sometimes failed to comprehend the essence of the regional integration movement, the truth is that thousands of ordinary Caribbean people do in fact, live that reality every day. In Barbados, our families are no longer exclusively Barbadian by island origin. We have Barbadian children of Jamaican mothers, Barbadian children of Antiguan and St. Lucian fathers. And there is no need to mention Trinidad which has always been tied to us not only by the inestimable bonds of consanguinity, but by the burgeoning cross-fertilization of cultural art forms. We are a family of islands nestling closely under the shelter of the great Cooperative Republic of Guyana. And this fact of regional togetherness is lived every day by ordinary West Indian men and women in their comings and goings.
Barbados owes it to itself and the region to demonstrate that it could continue to handle the challenges faced in these difficult times. I am confident that should Barbados engage the public and the academic community in rigorous debate and call for pertinent research, it would find the tools necessary for reaching out to different target groups and then address very specific issues with derived empirical guidance. We must aim at facilitating the social integration of immigrants and a Caribbean people accustomed to a conditioning of difference and insularity. Regardless, the immigrant population in Barbados will feel threatened by policies and practices that appear to sideline moral and ethical considerations even if the intent is well supported by the general population, and whether Barbados remains in the written context of the its laws. The Caribbean spirit still lives: we cannot undermine the toil of all those builders inclusive of Barrow, Burnham, Bird, and others who brought community to mean more than a divide due to geographical characteristics.
George C. Brathwaite
June, 2009
