Prime Minister David Thompson’s new immigration policy which addresses the vexing issue of undocumented CARICOM workers living in Barbados takes effect from today albeit a national holiday. The policy comes not too soon for many Barbadians who with their eyes see the problem for what it is, an open door immigration policy practiced by the previous government which was not sustainable. The woefully inadequate management information system at the Immigration Department to track people traffic across our borders has since been acknowledged by the Auditor General in his report for period 2008-2009. Those who oppose the Thompson policy point to the the issues of historical linkages between Barbados, Guyana and the other Caribbean islands, betraying the spirit of the Treaty of Chaguaramas, the tone of the Thompson government as a leader in the CSME movement and among other issues.
Interestingly enough the issue of respective Caribbean island governments having cause to focus on more tightly regulating immigration laws has been a hot topic in recent weeks if anyone is to peruse the regional newspapers. Guyana is battling with illegal immigrants from Brazil and China, Jamaica, Dominica Republic and the Bahamas continue to deal with the influx of Haitians, Antigua and Trinidad like Barbados has been at the end of a large inflow of Guyanese and so it continues across the Caribbean. It makes us wonder why Barbados continues to attract the bulk of the dissenting commentary since announcing a new policy to deal with the problem.
A corollary to the immigration debate has been the perspectives of many of those in academia with a secondary observation, the position of the Barbados Labour Party (BLP).
A visit to the website of Norman Girvan, Research Fellow at the University of the West Indies, St. Augustine list a series of submissions which cloak the problem of undocumented workers as being xenophobic and reckless on the part of Barbados. We couldn’t find any prominence of the view which Professor Girvan gives to the possibility that undocumented workers might possibly represent a socio-economic problem for Barbados and therefore requires an urgent response. To support the position we listened last year to a radio program where Girvan and UWI Lecturer Tennyson Joseph accused Prime Minister Thompson and by extension Barbados of reneging its leadership role on the matter of CSME. The discourse prompted Minister Chris Sinckler to respond by asking where had Barbados not met its obligations to CARICOM and CSME under the Thompson administration.
Last week Akintolove Corbin who has an academic role at the UWI Cave Hill again spoke with a fork tongue on the issue of immigration in Barbados while hosting a talk show. He readily admitted that Barbados has to manage immigration better than it has done in the past but was quick to add the caveat: Barbados must be careful not to derail it role in furthering the regional integration movement. Why append this condition when all Barbados has done is to make a policy decision as is the right of any sovereign country to do? Did Thompson not give an amnesty to the undocumented people in Barbados?
At the screening of the Annalee Davis 30 minute show which documented the anecdotes of mostly Indo-Guyanese negative experiences travelling into Barbados and a few other islands guess who put in an appearance to give vocal support? Dr. Keith Nurse, director of the Shridath Ramphal Centre for International Trade Law, Policy and Services at the Cave Hill Campus (Barbados) was quick to praise the work of Davis which portrayed Barbados as the big bully trying to keep Guyanese from entering Barbados. The Davis video made no attempt to capture the views of officialdom to provide the other view i.e. the Barbados Immigration Department, Police, Minister in government or even a senior journalist. The ease with which Dr. Nurse endorsed the amateur attempt by Davis to taint the reputation of Barbados which has always adopted a leadership role in the regional integration movement opens the door for his motives to be questioned.
The most vocal exception of those in academia has been Professor Michael Howard. It seems stupid that people of such high learning and accreditation would confuse the freedom of movement under the spirit of the Treaty of Chaguramus and the need for a 166 square mile island to manage the inflow of people from outside. We highlight spirit because as far as has been reported Barbados has honoured it commitment to the treaty by allowing those category of skill workers identified to to freely work under the CSME arrangement.
With interest we read the report of the Antigua Opposition Leader Lester Bird requesting the government to factor an amnesty in its new immigration policy but at the same time he seemed to be supportive. In Barbados the Opposition Barbados Labour Party has been to a man very unsympathetic to the position taken by the Thompson government. The government has been accused of taking a populist position which may jeopardize the implementation of CSME. Again of interest is the statement by Secretary General of CARICOM Edwin Carrington that the objectives of the integration movement may have to be revisited. It is clear that the immigration issue has been allowed to become a political football. It would have taken great courage to have announced the new immigration policy, Prime Minister David Thompson should take comfort in the knowledge that he has the support of the PEOPLE.
The discussion which will continue in the days and weeks to come must be informed by our leaders, especially the academics. The line between the sovereign right of Barbados to protect its borders and its obligation under the regional treaty is a narrow line but a line nevertheless.
The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.