Dear Editor,
The many critics of the Barbados government’s position regarding undocumented Caricom nationals include a couple of Caricom heads of government who have publicly remonstrated against the Thompson administration’s stance. They have argued that a Caricom member state must not ‘cherry-pick’ from the Caricom Single Market & Economy (CSME). One of the key elements of the CSME is the free movement of labour, but this is limited to qualified and skilled persons. The categories are university graduates, media persons, artists, musicians and sports persons. I do not believe that many, if any, of the undocumented immigrants fall into this category. Barbados as a sovereign state has the right to determine its immigration policy in light of undocumented immigrants.
There are those who oppose any amnesty which rewards those who have broken the law, and argue that it creates an incentive for continued illegal immigration in the future. Whether the amnesty will be successful is left to be seen, but it must be the country’s prerogative to enforce its laws.
The Prime Minister of Barbados’ mandate is from the Barbadian people and he has stated “We want to see the Caribbean develop together… and we are not going to take any action which is harmful to the objectives of Caricom… but we are also not going to take any action that is harmful to the Barbadian economy or the Barbadian society.” It is difficult to fault that reasoning.
Last July, President Jagdeo attending the Caricom Heads of Government Meeting in Antigua and Barbuda and speaking of the EPA, disclosed to the media that “Guyana remains committed to the regional integration process; as a sovereign state, the interests of the people must be considered and addressed.” It is also difficult to fault our President’s reasoning.
Guyanese migrate to Barbados to seek a better life, and deteriorating economic and social conditions, unemployment and little hope for improvements in the near future constitute the push factors for those yearning to leave. Many of those are undocumented. This undocumented workforce work in unregulated conditions, without access to protective recourse mechanisms and quite often in fear of being caught and deported. This leads in many instances to a denial of their basic human rights, such as discrimination to equal protection of the law. It is not clear whether action will be taken against those businesses that employed undocumented immigrants or whether the undocumented immigrants will be required to pay taxes on their earnings. Those are matters for the Barbados government.
There may be issues facing Guyanese in Barbados who have work permits and who are concerned about whether they will be renewed, and the old issue of the treatment of Guyanese by Immigration Officers at the Grantley Adams Airport. The Guyana Government may be well advised to focus on the plight of those Guyanese who have broken no laws and who encounter discriminatory and disrespectful behaviour simply because of their nationality.
Recently the Bahamian Prime Minister acknowledged that Jamaicans were often exposed to “insolent and rude” behaviour from Immigration Officers in the Bahamas, and he pointed out that, “Not all Jamaican nationals arriving in the Bahamas intend to overstay their allotted time. Not all… have a police record, nor are they engaged in illegal activity,” and he further slammed them by adding, “Yet, far too many Bahamian immigration officers greet Jamaicans… as if they were well known criminals. This is not acceptable; it must stop.” It is this sort of response that one wants from the Barbados Government when the issue of treatment of Guyanese is raised with them again.
The Guyana Government must be conscious of the impact of any mass deportation or repatriation of Guyanese from Barbados. The loss of remittances would adversely affect many households in Guyana.
The Government of Guyana has a responsibility to put policies in place to facilitate and encourage the return of its nationals. Those Guyanese may lack the financial and organisational resources to return and plan their economic and social reintegration back home. Providing these migrants with financial and other types of support as necessary can help to ensure their successful reintegration and enhance their contribution to development.
Apart from the benefit of family reunification if these Guyanese return and choose to remain in Guyana, they can provide a possible political bonus, since migration not only drains a country of workers but also voters. The politicians may derive direct benefit from their return.
President Jagdeo recently renewed his commitment “…to give true meaning to our independence and to build a nation in which our citizens can realize their aspirations, the government will continue to make investments aimed at enhancing the quality of life of our citizens especially the vulnerable.” As Guyanese we can have confidence that the Guyana Government will put policies in place for those who return to be reintegrated, as our President truly cares about the welfare of the people and the country he serves.
Yours faithfully,
Dawn A Holder
