331 responses to “Town Hall Meetings To Discuss Green Paper On Immigration”

1. 

   mash up & buy back

   January 29, 2010 at 12:40 pm

   
   

   David

   Why was he and not the MINISTER playing such an important role ?

   I know faria and annelee davis and others would have been there,they are very serious about their agenda.

   Loading…
2. 

   JC

   January 29, 2010 at 2:16 pm

   
   

   MUABB

   GG was invloved in immigration matters for a long time. (That is not to say that I think he should be at the forefront). I think he is to meek and is easily railroaded by these people ESPECIALLY GUYANESE!

   Loading…
3. 

   George Brathwaite

   January 29, 2010 at 3:01 pm

   
   

    
   Rethinking the Comprehensive Review of Immigration Policy and Proposals for Legislative Reform
   I thank you for this opportunity to make a contribution towards what must be described as a new direction for Barbados in terms of immigration policy, security, and regionalism. This is a complex combination that sits at the heart of Barbados’ developmental quests amidst rapid global transformations. A fundamental question that has to be asked, is whether we are eager to implement a policy direction that is popular but at the same time may not be right?
   The novelty of discussing the green paper in a public space suggests that communicative action may inspire deliberative democracy in Barbados. I am heartened although I remain cautious because of the propensity for political gain to be made based on popularity rather than necessity.
   Moreover, the public discussion appears to be ironic and late in coming. It comes across as a postscript for another mischief, namely, the relaxing of government’s voluntary accords for the enhancement of a spirit of Caribbean Community as captured under Article 45 of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas (RTC), which incidentally forms a part of Barbados’ domestic law.
   One cannot be idealistic or esoteric; yet there are some practicalities that seem to be overlooked or are being sidestepped in these proposals for reform that are contained in the green paper. There are missing areas of certainty in regards to the legal implications, lack of adequate statistical data to truly inform the basis of decision-making, and the presence of dubious qualitative and quantitative empirics that make one wonders whether these proposed reforms are intended for Barbados’ development or for other political goals and agendas of parties capable of benefitting from widely held perceptions.
   In essence, the green paper appears a stringent document that lacks the flexibility necessary to account for most of the nuances that now appear to be problematic. Full exposure coupled with the rationale for moving in particular directions especially when corrective measures are going against the grain of international conventions and norms, and the clarity of information need to be put into the public domain. This practice informs those publics who are detached from the facts but are eager to follow popular perceptions.
   For instance, what do we mean by “an inordinate level of school fees [that] remain unpaid” (p.17 §50)? And what is the ratio of persons, locals versus non-nationals, that contribute to “an increase in the general abuse of its medical and health care facilities, with an increase in cases of fees for services also remaining unpaid” (p.17 §50)? How many persons are adequately equipped with the knowledge that the RTC is part of Barbados’ domestic laws and that there are international conventions that Barbados has agreed to or otherwise seen fit to legally support and/or ratify which must therefore attract greater merit than currently obtains?
   William Wallace, an international theorist, advances the view that ‘politics follows its own logic, not simply those of economics and technology.’ I am in agreement with his sentiments based upon the evidence of the political and social processes that have brought Barbadians and others together in forums designed to reach a way forward. Contemporary political logic in Barbados is worthy of our attention for putting the dynamics of immigration policies pursued by Barbados into their rightful contexts. This means doing what is right and socially just overshadows the proclivity to be insular or myopic.
   There is little doubt that Barbados’ voluntary membership in CARICOM, together with current market conditions in an interdependent world are further linked to the human rights of individuals (i.e. nationals, and immigrants alike) and therefore, calls for appropriate development agendas despite the myriad security concerns that impact upon a nation are sine qua non. Indeed, Barbados’ sovereign rights are exercised through the autonomy of the country to choose notwithstanding that sovereignty does not entail us to do as we please and in the manner that pleases us to the detriment of nationals from other jurisdictions.
   Each aspect of exercising sovereignty, passing legislation, and arrangements that involve citizens of other countries has implications for what Barbados can or cannot put into practice. In other words, although Barbados maintains its choice to pursue particular policy directions due to its sovereign status, and it has the sanctity of Parliament to make and pass laws, the island is duty-bound to think about many considerations that go beyond the securitisation of national borders especially in the context of a regional space and the spatiality of regional and international communities.
   In this regard, I understand and generally accept the sections outlined in §60 to 76, although one would believe that the answers rest in §77 and 78 which call for greater regional cooperation. If I may add, the collective management of regional resources appears to be a co-requisite for attending to the issues outlined in those sections.
   My agreement with proposed reforms in these areas is by no means to suggest that the intricacies of regionalism or interdependence ought to supersede the national government’s responsibilities to its people. Rather, I am suggesting that part of the obligations to safeguard the interests, rights, security, and livelihoods of Barbadians is the accurate accumulation, dissemination and sharing of information. We must fully inform and engage Barbadians together with stakeholders of the associated problems and economic costs that stem from too rigid or too relaxed policies and laws. In this vein, The Barbados Auditor General’s Report of 2008 is indicative. It observes that:
   It would be expected that the Immigration Department would have a system in place which would record all the relevant information on persons entering and leaving the country. The production of reports on persons remaining without permission should be evaluated; and effective action taken to better manage the process. However, there is no evidence that such reports were requested and analysed by management on a systematic basis, for the purpose of decision making.
   The report further stresses 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 problem represents an indictment on the administrative system; it does not discredit the value of immigration officers in carrying out optimal performance in the course of their duties, but it does necessitate that the internal organs and structures of the immigration department needs to be urgently salvaged.
   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 systemic inadequacies associated with this important agency through which Barbadians ought to feel that their collective security is not compromised due to internal deficiencies and/or shortages in well-trained manpower.
   I reiterate my agreement with the government’s stance for reform on several issues. Rightly, there comes a time in the life of a nation when “the legislation governing current immigration practices” (p.1) becomes necessary for review. Times have truly changed, and as stated in the green paper, “commitments to CARICOM, globalisation and its attendant demands, [coupled with] the freer movement of people across borders, border security issues and … the need to strengthen our institutions” (p.1) compel the Barbados Government to act accordingly.
   Naturally, our actions must go beyond economics and politics to include socio-cultural and psycho-social dynamics. Attracting needed investments and shaping the productive and developmental infrastructures of the Barbadian economy are priorities, but more so, people and a sense of humanity must matter most. Hence, I concur that our need for a review of policies must consider and address issues for “strengthening our economic base, ensuring the safety and security of our people, and embracing internationally accepted levels of governance” (p.1).
   Problems and Implications
   I continue from the same page that acknowledges the importance of “national security and national development” (p. 1). Incidentally, I believe it is appropriate to point out that policies aimed at immigration control are usually divided into two main types: policing policies (i.e. border control policy), and policies aimed at legalising or controlling illegal and/or irregular immigrants. From my perspective, the green paper that we are here discussing attempts to combine emphasis around these two nodal points of policing and legislation. However, it is difficult to see eye-to-eye with the government based upon erroneous articulations and contradictions that are embedded within the green paper. Specifically, these are:
   1. Making use of outdated laws from other jurisdictions to support the intentions of the national reform. In particular as cited under §37 on page 13, there is reference to ‘Article 8A of the Treaty of Rome’ and it is footnoted with specific reference to the 1992 Maastricht Treaty. The Treaty of Amsterdam and decisions taken at the Tampere Summit together with Judicial Review exposes exactly why this green paper that we are discussing cannot rely on the Treaty of Rome for any practical efficacy.

   Even with the citation of Article 48 (3) and the sentences following as quoted in the green paper, there is a recognisable distortion. I quote, “protection is offered only to employed persons and those seeking employment” yet in the same paragraph there is a statement announcing that “no protection is offered to the unemployed or those without a steady income” (p. 13). Barbadians need to be able to ascertain which statement is correct? I reckon that both statements cannot be accurate.

   Furthermore, there is explicit purpose regarding EU laws which differentiates between EU citizens and persons deemed to be Third Country Nationals (TCNs). Why are we not making this demarcation clear to Barbadians and CARICOM citizens? My final point on this item is to suggest to the drafters of this document that §38 is also misleading and grossly inaccurate. I direct those involved to the sources indicated above, that being the Treaty of Amsterdam for example.

   2. The plan for a discriminatory ‘guest worker programme’, as being proposed by the government, that targets CARICOM nationals. Guest worker programmes have been implemented elsewhere across Europe and the developed world with mixed successes. The strategic purposes for such programmes are couched so as to attend to supply/demand in the domestic labour markets as well as to control immigration practices by allowing for ‘circular movement’ (i.e. to encourage immigrants to return to the sending destinations but also leaving probabilities for return without becoming a burden on the host country).

   In principal, I believe that a guest-worker programme can work and may ease some of the tensions and problems associated with work-related migration into Barbados. Nevertheless, I cannot agree with setting up such a mechanism for CARICOM nationals bearing in mind the intent of Article 45 of the RTC and the fact that such actions may run directly counter to Articles 7, 8, and 9 (i.e. non-discrimination, most favoured nation treatment, and general undertakings consistent with the intent of the treaty).

   It appears that a guest-worker programme could become a redundant mechanism to be used against ‘low-skilled’ labour within the region despite there may be compelling reasons to invite such persons to work in sectors. This fact is borne out in the green paper and serves up another contradiction. While §109 to 118 stress a reasonably orchestrated order for managing the guest worker programme and ensuring migrants’ rights and that legal protections meet with international standards and conventions, these sections expose the dichotomy of holding to a CARICOM ideal of freedom of movement, the elimination of work permits, and hassle-free travel. Unfortunately, we continue to evade the realities faced by ordinary people and therefore the proposal attempts to exclude bona fide persons seeking work. We must never forget the words of the Right Excellent Errol W. Barrow. In 1986 the National Hero of Barbados pleaded for the flexibility, tolerance and social justice that appears missing from the green paper. Barrow states that fundamental to our progress we ought to be mindful that:
   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 transformational and difficult recessionary times. Of course we can and should ‘regulate labour’. Yet there is scepticism on my part for reform that will be taking on greater administrative burdens than the Immigration Department could possibly cope with given the history of bureaucratic avenues that one must travel, and the well-established premise that government is not always the best arbiter for spurring or expanding economic growth in a country.

   There are situations in which labour demand vastly struggles against available supply of domestic labour (e.g. agriculture, construction, and to a lesser extent home care assistants and services). While the green paper speaks to a proposal for “providing a prompt response to the demands of the labour market” (p81 §118), it is unlikely to foresee any substantial changes in the speed with which the processes can achieve the requisite levels of efficiency.

   Further to the recommendations placing employers in a no-win situation, I do not believe that being excessively punitive to employers who recruit CARICOM labour should be encouraged as has been put in this green paper. However, I do see the need for guiding regulations and for the enshrinement of migrants’ rights as indispensable corollaries to building and expanding Barbados’s economic infrastructure alongside the same for the regional sphere.

   What is most disturbing and amounts to a sense of blatant discrimination is a recommendation that there could be a refusal to grant further permits to an employer who finds himself in breech of the relevant laws and specifically with regards to being party to an employee who is “transferring from working with the employer of original approval to another without obtaining the department’s permission” (p. 70 §101). The devil is in the fact that the same paragraph in the green paper states that “however this does not apply to International Business Companies” (p. 70 §101). How crude can we be by giving exclusivity to the international and discriminating against CARICOM and local entities? I am surprised that no comments have been made in this regard by the Minister of Labour or any of the corporate and representative bodies local and resident in Barbados.
   3. The over-emphasis on ‘border security’ as a result of 9/11, as stated in the document and recently repeated by the Chief Immigration Officer, despite not making more purposeful attempts to counter some of the infelicities and shortcomings that are outlined in the Auditor General’s 2008 report, is disconcerting. I believe that poor management mechanisms and pronounced misunderstandings in relation to the management of labour migration contribute to the tension-generating ills that we hear on call-in programmes and that from time to time appear in the local print media.

   Border security is highly important, but I am sure that if it is blown out of proportion and Barbados wants to legislate unilaterally without sufficiently relying or cooperating with regional neighbours, this may even make the proposals become dysfunctional. There is an additional pillar of CARICOM that should play a decisive role and influence our national policies without the targeting of CARICOM nationals.

   Further to this, evidence from around the world shows that migration networks when forced underground actually become much more problematic to monitor and control. My friend Dennis Johnson from VOB suggests that ‘if you make people feel like outlaws they will operate outside of the law’. Therefore, what is this green paper saying to CARICOM nationals? The least this green paper should reflect is a direction that keeps within the scope of the RTC as would redound to the mutual benefit of Barbados and the region.

   Added to this is the proposed intention to make provisions and “priority treatment for investors” who may not necessarily be CARICOM nationals but as a consequence would attain preferential status above regional citizens. While this is being pragmatic it is also discriminatory and goes against the grain of what may be in the best interest of Barbados and is definitely against the spirit of CARICOM. I believe the proposals in the green paper have to reflect a greater flexibility while giving preference to CARICOM investors. This is directly tied to the contradictory sections outlined in §55 through 58.
   4. Despite recognising that we are living in an “age of increased movement of people” (p.4) there appears to be a regressive and punitive dimension to this comprehensive immigration policy reform. As stated in the relevant sections, the ‘green paper’ goes beyond what we in this country of Barbados would traditionally expect in terms of orientation, yet it falls short in terms of innovativeness. Barbados is a country accustomed to demonstrating regional leadership. This green paper while encouraging in some aspects, is deficient in demonstrating Barbados’ capacity to formulate new tools and to utilise technological efficiencies to maximise its own position in the regional setting of CARICOM. What better safeguards and security tools could a government offer its people?

   5. The absence of proposed legislation curbing a growing tendency in Barbados for the media to inflame public perceptions over immigration practices directly relating to racial, ethnic, religious, and xenophobic behaviours. These are problem elements that have been in circulation elsewhere and for which the UN (i.e. inclusive of Barbados’ participation) have recognised as being unmerited in today’s world. The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination referring to the Durban Declaration recognises that “xenophobia against non-nationals, particularly migrants, refugees and asylum-seekers, constitutes one of the main sources of contemporary racism and that human rights violations against members of such groups occur widely in the context of discriminatory, xenophobic and racist practices.” The recommendation at §12 of that document was for states and agencies to “take resolute action to counter any tendency to target, stigmatize, stereotype or profile, on the basis of race, colour, descent, and national or ethnic origin, members of ‘non-citizen’ population groups, especially by politicians, officials, educators and the media, on the internet and other electronic communications networks and in society at large.” I am contending that this green paper has not gone far enough because it does not address these concerns which have, from time to time, become manifest in Barbados.

   6. Issues pertaining to the granting, or better stated, the refusal of citizenship of persons born in Barbados to undocumented migrants “unless one parent qualifies to move under the Revised Treaty and fulfils the residency requirement applicable” (p.5) is regrettable. Many descendants of Barbados have over the years benefitted in other peoples’ countries from the fact that their children have acquired citizenship due to place of birth despite their status at that time of giving birth. I draw on the UN’s High Commission for Human Rights to suggest that while we in Barbados have a right to choose, we ought to be conscious of the implications of our actions. Under articles 7 and 8 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child it is accepted that the principle of jus soli has emerged as the overriding international norm governing the nationality of children born to non-citizen parents, in particular if they would be stateless. If as these proposals contained in the green paper are suggesting that the principle of jus soli will no longer stand, but it will make the necessary provisions to acknowledge adopted children by Barbadian parents, then this strikes me as a contradiction and an injustice. Is this what we want? Do we need to ostracise those persons born in Barbados who we ought to be protecting based on the convention? This measure in the reform should be dismissed immediately. In contrast, the ‘special proposal’ referring to those children who through adoption by Barbadians may be granted citizenship rights is appropriate given the same basis as outlined in the convention. Why should the ‘adopted child’ take precedence over the child born in Barbados?

   7. The redundancy that speaks to a “prescription of the period (two years) of cohabitation of Barbadians and their non-Barbadian spouses before the grant of citizenship” (p.5). Who will monitor the period of courtship? Will there come a time in Barbados when a government will legislate that its people in order to reduce the numbers of divorces have to conform to a regimented period of courtship? What messages are we sending to people further afield when they are coming to this country and appreciating the levels of liberal tenets and democracy that exist here? In my opinion, while we want to eliminate fraudulent marriages and rightly so, we cannot become a state that enters the bedrooms of consenting adults to find ‘proof’ that “could be provided of cohabitation for two years prior to the application” for citizenship and permanent residence (p. 58 §60). I think that we have to find other mechanisms and attach a more significant cost to whatever tool we use so as to discourage sham marriages.
   In presenting the itemised problematic regarding immigration reform, I wholly support the view of any policies that seek to clearly define the basis of Barbadian citizenship and the various channels through which one can legally reside and work in Barbados thereby contributing to national development in a safe environment. Moreover, efforts for the protection of human rights of persons, these I deem to be of vital importance regardless of status and especially as they relate to CARICOM nationals.
   I am also of the view that much more research needs to be put into the equation before acting prematurely based on an uninformed public to many of the nuances that shape immigration policy in Barbados, the region, and the international system of states. The government needs to slow down and challenge the scholars and technocrats in this country to come up with practical solutions that do not infringe on the rights or livelihoods of Barbadians and non-Nationals. Yes! We need to manage our resources, borders, and our domestic spaces, but not at the expense of creating major roadblocks and problems down the road especially with our brothers and sisters that share this common Caribbean civilisation.

   Loading…
4. 

   JC

   January 29, 2010 at 3:54 pm

   
   

   STUPSE!

   Loading…
5. 

   Young Bajan

   January 29, 2010 at 5:21 pm

   
   

   Now i use to think PDC use to write long things but this man, they don’t teach how to be concise anymore or is it our nature just to long winded and extended in everything we present. Speeches are no different, go on for hours and lose everyone on the points. I agree JC, STUPSE!!!!!!

   Loading…
6. 

   Sapidillo

   January 29, 2010 at 5:31 pm

   
   

   Whew, I am tired. Whatever happen to precis writing.

   Loading…
7. 

   ac

   January 29, 2010 at 6:44 pm

   
   

   @GeorgeBrathwaite
   get to the point i don’t have all day and night to read your essay.Make it short and sweet

   Loading…
8. 

   The Scout

   January 30, 2010 at 2:03 am

   
   

   In the end all George Brathwaite is saying is that all this talk about amnesty and deportation is hot air. Non-nationals and especially regionalists are permitted to come into Barbados and compete with bajans not only for work but housing, education and land. All the hard work done by our ancestors is being usurped by non-nationals simply because elected politicians have sold out this country.

   Loading…
9. 

   Adrian Hinds

   January 30, 2010 at 9:59 am

   
   

   It’s a treatise. Forget GB candidate for a PhD. There are plenty of current situations in our world that are reminders, not to take seriuosly, and not to act on the actions and opinions of persons such GB candidate for a PhD. Their interest has been shown time and time again, not to be yours.

   GB candidate for a PhD said the following
   ————–
   A fundamental question that has to be asked, is whether we are eager to implement a policy direction that is popular but at the same time MAY not be “RIGHT”?
   ———————–

   No GB the fundamental question must be. Who gets to decide for all of Barbadians, what is RIGHT?

   We live in a representative democracy. We choose those who MUST represent us in our Parliament, therefore WE THE PEOPLE DECIDE WHAT IS RIGHT.

   Now I understand that such a declaration oppose the core of what is believed by Academics of the liberal and socialist kind.

   Academics, liberals, and socialist, cannot give the power of national decision making to persons not as learnt as they believe themselves to be. It is why many celebrate Chavez of Venezuela’s rise to power, but do not speak of his ongoing actions, secretely understanding if not justifying the kook rationale for said actions.

   Folks you would be foolish to let someone whose only real claim to fame is that they may have read more books than you, dictate and dcide what is “RIGHT” for you when you know best. Make your vote and thus your parliamentary representative accountable TO YOU.

   Loading…
10. 

    David

    February 2, 2010 at 7:15 pm

    
    

    BU would welcome a report on the meeting to be held at the Alexandra School tomorrow night.

    Loading…
11. 

    WHAT

    February 2, 2010 at 8:37 pm

    
    

    After one year in Office, this DLP government has failed miserably. The DLP government is struggling and seem to be a Government that is not with it.
    WHAT will become of the DLP ???

    Loading…
12. 

    WHAT

    February 2, 2010 at 8:38 pm

    
    

    sorry two years not one (before they bite of muh head now boa !

    Loading…
13. 

    mash up & buy back

    February 5, 2010 at 7:16 am

    
    

    David

    Any report on the town hall meeting last night at the Alexandra school?

    Loading…
14. 

    littleboy

    February 5, 2010 at 8:51 am

    
    

    The Alexandra meet was well attended. Only one short-coming, Mr Greaves needs to learn good ole Bajan manners.He should leave out the personal comments and LISTEN.There is no need to embarrass contributors.The reason for these meets is to find out what BAJANS think and want.

    Loading…
15. 

    mash up & buy back

    February 5, 2010 at 3:35 pm

    
    

    Littleboy

    You must understand the gilbert greaves is not too pleased with the halt to the large influx of guyanese and other non nationals because when he was CIO he was very ‘helpful’ to them.

    Could you give us a summary of the meeting and what questions were asked and the mood of the people etc?

    Loading…
16. 

    X-MAN

    February 5, 2010 at 6:55 pm

    
    

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/with-the-death-of-boa-sr-her-people-and-their-songs-fall-silent-forever-1890047.html

    Loading…
17. 

    David

    February 5, 2010 at 10:20 pm

    
    

    @mash up

    BU did not get a report on the St. Peter meeting. Hopefully littleboy can give us an update.

    Loading…
18. 

    mash up & buy back

    February 6, 2010 at 9:12 am

    
    

    Where did this chief immigration officer Irene Griffith come from?

    Did she work in the Immigration department before?

    I noticed last night on the news at the town hall meeting at Alexandra and before at the one in christ-church, that this chief immigration officer mentions the 2 year proposal for citzenship without advising those persons attending that they however can suggest a longer or shorter time frame for citizenship.

    Some people might take it as a given.

    Gilbert greaves comes across as a very insincere,shady character every time he speaks.

    Loading…
19. 

    David

    February 6, 2010 at 10:54 am

    
    

    @mash up

    To be fair the green paper contains recommendations. It is up to us
    the public to feedback.

    Loading…
20. 

    mash up & buy back

    February 6, 2010 at 12:15 pm

    
    

    David

    How many of the average working class people can access the document on the internet?

    Other than that they have to find the public library or go to the government printery.

    In these hard times with people having little spare time for their family,the reality is many of them can’t do any of the above.

    This is why going through the green paper bit by bit on radio and t.v. would have been more useful.

    Loading…
21. 

    David

    February 6, 2010 at 1:19 pm

    
    

    @mash up

    Your suggestion is valid. To use electronic channels to conduct a town hall would call for the pricipals involved to distance themselves from the civil service mentality which reigns supreme. Let us continue to hope.

    Loading…
22. 

    littleboy

    February 6, 2010 at 4:30 pm

    
    

    I will give a better report later today

    Loading…
23. 

    Macmalone

    February 6, 2010 at 7:59 pm

    
    

    This CIO previously worked as a Senior Canadian immigration officer.After returning to Barbados she was given a job by this DLP administration before the 14 year rule of the last BLP administration started .

    Loading…
24. 

    littleboy

    February 6, 2010 at 10:37 pm

    
    

    Once again the focus at the Alexandra meeting was the regularising ot the status of married immigrants.
    Nuff suggestions were made but Mr Greaves interrupted everyone and even made personal slurs about a few of the contributors.

    A Mr Weeks from Gibbs was told that …’we have reports of illegal immigrants even in Gibbs…and the chief investigating officer…will be paying you a visit…”.

    Another was told that his story about…” a woman who owns a car and a house and is now estranged from her husband in less than two years” was …”a half of story…and I know your story is personal…I do not know why people bring their personal stories here…”.
    Mr Keith Simmonds reply to Mr Edmund Hinkson and others about the “lack of statistics…” was that …”everybody in Barbados knows the problem already and no need to explain why the legislation is to be changed…”

    Loading…
25. 

    Anonymous

    February 6, 2010 at 11:20 pm

    
    

    Sounds like Gilbert Greaves was being tough on the pro-immigration bleeding heart crowd asking questions.

    If he was which I will find strange, I don’t have a problem with that.

    Loading…
26. 

    Another Mouse

    February 7, 2010 at 9:50 am

    
    

    It seems as though only people who have a vested interest in accomodating illegal immigrants or currently having issues with the immigration department, are attending these meetings.

    The illegal immigrants were living in Gibbs for donkey years so I do not believe that the immigration are only now aware of them.

    Truth be told, the authorities do not really care about this and we complacent Bajans will soon suffer the consequences of our actionswhen this pappy show ends.

    I believe this is just another smokescreen to conceal a deed that has already been done.

    Loading…
27. 

    Another Mouse

    February 7, 2010 at 9:50 am

    
    

    It seems as though only people who have a vested interest in accomodating illegal immigrants or currently having issues with the immigration department, are attending these meetings.

    The illegal immigrants were living in Gibbs for donkey years so I do not believe that the immigration are only now aware of them.

    Truth be told, the authorities do not really care about this and we complacent Bajans will soon suffer the consequences of our actions when this pappy show ends.

    I believe this is just another smokescreen to conceal a deed that has already been done.

    Loading…
28. 

    mash up & buy back

    February 7, 2010 at 10:57 am

    
    

    Another Mouse

    You are spot on there.

    It seems as though Gilbert greaves already knew of illegal persons living in Gibbs and was now at a town hall meeting making a show about immigration paying them a visit.

    I believe that whereas those who want strong immigration laws are not aware of the meetings because the government of barbados is more concerned about talking about haiti and other smoke screens rather than heavily promoting these town hall meeting;,those in this country who have a vested interested in enlarging this population with non nationals from whatever country are all attending these meetings and submitting proposals on the immigration green paper to further their cause.

    See annalee davis and the vere davis clan,norman faria,the BLP politicians,the pimps and the whores and all else in between.

    Look around and you will find that black people are always their own worst enemy.

    They promote the cause of the other races over the interests of their own.

    Big steupse.

    Loading…
29. 

    Enuff

    February 7, 2010 at 2:23 pm

    
    

    “Look around and you will find that black people are always their own worst enemy. They promote the cause of the other races over the interests of their own.”

    Wait all the illegals in Barbados or non-black?

    Loading…
30. 

    David

    February 8, 2010 at 6:15 pm

    
    

    @mash up

    Our source remains firm the information about Ellis is true. Why not give him a call.

    Loading…
31. 

    mash up & Buy back

    February 8, 2010 at 6:33 pm

    
    

    David

    Will accept your word on the matter.

    It will be interesting to see if he will stay in the field or make a career change.

    On the immigration town halls,the Barbados Advocate has an article by erica lazare on the Alexandra town hall meeting.

    Seems that the people were very forthright in airing their concerns.

    Citizenship by marriage a big topic at second Green Paper Town Hall

    2/8/2010

    By Erica Lazare

    Citizenship by virtue of marriage, along with the harbouring of illegal immigrants, special dispensations for foreign investors and citizenship for Barbadian-born children to undocumented parents seemed to be the topics most important to the public as the Ministry of Labour and Immigration continued its series of town hall meetings regarding the Green Paper on Immigration, with a session last Thursday night at the Alexandra School in St. Peter.

    Minister of State in the Ministry of Labour and Immigration, Senator Arni Walters and other senior Immigration Department officials chairing the meeting, were kept on their toes all night as they faced an onslaught of queries as all members of the public were invited to attend the meeting to air their views on the proposals contained in the Green Paper before the process of writing the Paper into legislation as the White Paper on Immigration.

    Currently the recommendation is that after a two-year period of cohabitation of which there is permission for the non-national to reside, that individual can work until the approval of citizenship is granted through marriage. However, there were several proposals given during the meeting on the length of time that should be required for cohabitation of Barbadians and their non-Barbadian spouses before citizenship, with one gentleman adamantly advocating that common-law spouses should be included in legislation as it is the “most common type of relationship in the region” and it should “not be excluded” on moral and legal grounds.

    Chief immigration Officer, Erine Griffith in her response, clarified that our legislation does not give a Barbadian man or woman the right to bring a common-law spouse to Barbados to live and that it has to be that way because a Barbadian cannot do the same in other countries. She added that all legislation in the region should be the same across the board and CARICOM is trying to achieve this.

    In response to a comment by a young lady in the school hall regarding her view that CARICOM nationals should be taken more seriously as persons automatically think about two or three regional islands where immigration matters are concerned while Central and South Americans and Europeans seemingly exist under the immigration radar.

    Griffith, calmly and succinctly responded: “Barbados is the island of choice within the region, all we are asking is that persons move legally whether they are from CARICOM, Britain, Canada or the Netherlands and the legislation we are proposing is not determined by individual nationalities”.

    On the issue of special entry permits for investors, Senator Arnie Walters, Minister of State in the Ministry of Labour and Immigration, explained that Barbados “is a small island trying to operate within a globalised framework” and over the years banks, insurance companies and other international business entities have helped the economy to grow with many local jobs gained through the allowance of these permits.

    Mr. Gilbert Greaves, Permanent Secretary of Defence and Security in the Ministry of Labour and Immigration, expressed that the proposals do not have to intention of penalising or disadvantaging persons and that the department is working on statistics to accurately aid them in their final decisions.

    He added: “We do take CARICOM seriously but this is a dynamic process and I get the impression so far that persons are not too much adverse to the proposal, only a few moderations, and next week we will adjust accordingly, taking your suggestions in mind”.

    The next meeting will take place the following Thursday, February 11, at the Princess Margaret Secondary School at 7: 30 p.m.

    –

    Loading…
32. 

    X-MAN

    February 10, 2010 at 4:15 am

    
    

    Interesting article. It would appear that the Barbados government is copying the UK model of immigration.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1249797/Labour-threw-open-doors-mass-migration-secret-plot-make-multicultural-UK.html

    Loading…
33. 

    X-man

    February 10, 2010 at 8:28 am

    
    

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/property/article-1249440/The-1bn-resort-Tiger-Woods.html

    Another day, and yet another news story promoting the wealthy world elite, greedily, purchasing their piece of paradise in our beloved Caribbean. These stories do not impress me. Look beyond the bling and the fabulous wealth. Do you believe that our Caribbean should be shared with these wealthy parasites or even those seeking refuge from other parts. Please tell me, exactly how does the afro-masses benefit from those who are using our islands as a welcoming mat.

    The road to our emancipation was long and treacherous; the road to re-colonisation is on the horizon. Your political elite are driving you towards this terrible abomination. Barbados it is not too late for you to defend your interests. Your spiritual ancestors expect nothing less. Long may the Afro-Bajan reign supreme in his spiritual home.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/property/article-1249440/The-1bn-resort-Tiger-Woods.html

    Loading…
34. 

    Spotting-Prejudice

    February 10, 2010 at 8:51 am

    
    

    @X-MAN
    “Interesting article. It would appear that the Barbados government is copying the UK model of immigration.”
    Wrong my friend. No copying here because the UK model does not place barriers to entry from those persons within the EU. The barriers exist against persons deemed to be ‘third country nationals’. So why do we want to ostracise CARICOM nationals. The answer is clear; the current government wants Barbados to return to being a homogenous community and thereby hinder the developmental path of the country. Migration, and specifically intra-regional migration, is essential for national and regional development. The UK realised that and hence became more immersed in what has become known as ‘fortress Europe’. A word to the wise is sufficient.

    Loading…
35. 

    The Scout

    February 10, 2010 at 8:56 am

    
    

    The whole debate on immigration can only be beneficial if the powers that be, take the bull by it’s horns and face this matter head on and answer the more vexing queries, I.E. the influx of multi national persons along with their cultures in this country. How is this going to mix with what is bajan or are we to give up our culture to benefit others while they can enjoy theirs back in their countries. If a chinese commits murder in Barbados, he/she would go to Dodds for a period and then released, if a barbadian is caught with drugs in china, he would be executed. Indo guyanese treat black guyanese as lessor mortals, just check their print media and see the level of crime against blacks in that country, when this group establishes itself in Barbados in great enough numbers, this practice is going to also migrate to this country with them. Are bajan prepared to be treated like the black guyanese in their own country? These are some of the grassroot questions that need to be answered at these Town Hall Meetings.

    Loading…
36. 

    X-man

    February 10, 2010 at 11:00 am

    
    

    @Spotting-Prejudice

    Pray tell me, what is this “delevopment”, that you so crave?

    Loading…
37. 

    X-man

    February 10, 2010 at 11:08 am

    
    

    @The Scout

    I would ask you politely, to share your glasses with those “knuckled head politicians” who are supposed to be leading your country.

    Loading…
38. 

    Adrian Hinds

    February 10, 2010 at 11:11 am

    
    

    No other caribbean country can boast of out performing Barbados with regards to the movement of skilled nationals. Skilled Barbadians have suffered entry issues in other caricom countries.

    Barbados is one of six CARICOM member states which adopted the Single Market
    with effect from January 01, 2006, and which signed on January 30, 2006, the formal
    declaration that signalled the launch of the CARICOM Single Market. The Caribbean
    Community (Movement of Skilled Nationals) Act (2004-13) was passed by Parliament and
    came into operation on January 24, 2005. This act allowed the five categories of persons
    listed in Article 46 of the Caribbean Community Act, 2003-8 (which in Barbados makes
    provision for matters arising out of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas), the right to enter the
    country to seek and engage in employment,. This was a necessary step in implementing the
    provisions of that Article.

    Loading…
39. 

    Negroman

    February 10, 2010 at 11:19 am

    
    

    The Prime Minister is schedule to speak at the last Town Hall meeting that is to be held at Solidarity House,next Thursday.
    I would encourage all Barbadians to attend that meeting and listen to our Prime Minister doing his fancy foot dancing with a lot of pretty talk and empty rhetoric.

    The reports I have received from the two previous meetings are not that impressive that we should have a sense of satisfaction that the government is committed to bring into being an effective immigration policy.
    Generally,it seems it is the same old talk with the top officials in the immigration department repeating the same old tired message of the negative impact illegal immigration is having on Barbados.I am sick & tire of hearing that old bull shit talk.If we have illegals in our s=country and they are caught,the simple thing to do is to send them out of the country.If we have illegal children going to school and those children should not be in school,the simple thing to do is to put them out of the school system and send them and their parents out of the country.I am tire of all the excuses.

    The illegals in Barbados are thumping their noses at we Barbadians and are even insisting that they are not leaving no matter what.They are saying we are only a nation of talkers and that our leaders do not have the balls or the country does not have the financial resources to remove them in any greater numbers.

    I thank the Town Hall meetings are not going to achieve the desire results in shaping a new immigration policy for Barbados.The green paper is soon going to become the white paper and official immigration policy for Barbados without any significant altercations.The 2 year cohabitation period of a marriage between a non-national & a Barbadian is going to remain despite the strong objection from Barbadians.Marriages of convenience is still going to be practised and the free for all selling of our lands to non-nationals is still going to be the norm.I cannot foresee any major radical immigration reforms that would bring about any meaningful
    changes that would curtail the high influx of non-nationals into Barbados.

    The die has been cast and I believe the situation is relative hopeless for us Black Barbadians,but we must persevere for the sake of our Black children & grand children.

    Loading…
40. 

    Negroman

    February 10, 2010 at 11:24 am

    
    

    The word in the last paragraph should be alterations and not altercations.

    Loading…
41. 

    Negroman

    February 10, 2010 at 11:51 am

    
    

    Town Hall meeting planned for tomorrow at Princess Margaret Secondary School has been cancelled because of the Prime Minister’s Press Conference that is scheduled for tomorrow night.

    Interesting development.

    Loading…
42. 

    Jay

    February 11, 2010 at 8:25 pm

    
    

    @X-MAN
    “Interesting article. It would appear that the Barbados government is copying the UK model of immigration.”
    Wrong my friend. No copying here because the UK model does not place barriers to entry from those persons within the EU. The barriers exist against persons deemed to be ‘third country nationals’. So why do we want to ostracise CARICOM nationals. The answer is clear; the current government wants Barbados to return to being a homogenous community and thereby hinder the developmental path of the country. Migration, and specifically intra-regional migration, is essential for national and regional development. The UK realised that and hence became more immersed in what has become known as ‘fortress Europe’. A word to the wise is sufficient
    —————————————————————————————————————————–

    It is quite obvious which part of the argument you’re apart of friend,but certainly your information isn’t accurate.If you live in the UK you certainly know how the native population feels about certain types of immigration including those from Eastern Europe,especially Poland,that are also apart of the EU.Some of the native population of the UK if you listen carefully is saying ALL forms of immigration including those within the EU are also high why do you think the Tories are becoming popular despite their somewhat racist tone & all across Europe Immigration restrictionist are getting into the EU parliament ! I’ve spoken with many British whom are outraged at the fact they are being taxed like crazy so that another member state can enjoy the same benefits if not better than the ones they currently have,when those same taxes could be put to better use like growing their own economy or have a lower tax model if they were out of the EU[which won’t happen now because of LISBON TREATY,BTW].The UK Tories have threatened consistently to pull the UK out of the EU if elected in to power.

    The ideal of Barbados being apart of a “homogenous community” is nothing but an “IDEAL” & Barbados being responsible for its implementation only makes this problem all the more difficult to deal with.One must be practical in implementation while not letting dreams & ideals conquer reality & hard facts.I am convinced that an implementative version of the European model would not work for the Caribbean Community & wasting money in its implementation could have dire consequences as no country within the Community would have anything really to fall back on should this Intra-regional EXPERIMENT fail.

    Bottom-line is this,FREE MOVEMENT ON A CONTINENT IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN THAT OF FREEMOVEMENT AMONGST VARYING LARGE & SMALL ISLANDS APART OF THE SAME “COMMUNITY” WITH VERY LARGE DIFFERENCES IN ECONOMIC STANDARDS ! Practical restrictions MUST be in place on allowing mass migration to ISLANDS that cannot support population centres that number in Millions.Imagine if Haiti being apart of the community had complete Free-movement access ? Most in the Regionalist camp only seem to promote the benefits but not the severe pitfalls that come with such moves.I am not anti-immigrant or anti-integration,but I am Pro-practical first & foremost above all else.

    Loading…
43. 

    Jay

    February 11, 2010 at 8:29 pm

    
    

    I’d just like to add that as so called “third country nationals” Barbados citizens are not excluded from “Fortress Europe” & more recently the French islands where visas are NOT required to enter with just a Barbados passport.

    Loading…
44. 

    X-Man

    February 12, 2010 at 11:19 am

    
    

    My blood is boiling. Are you aware that the Barbadian government has guaranteed 60m dollars (of tax payers money )to ensure that building work for the Four Seasons may continue. What a disgrace!

    http://property.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/property/buying_and_selling/article7022981.ece

    Loading…
45. 

    X-man

    February 12, 2010 at 4:13 pm

    
    

    @ jay

    Vigilance is what we require. The colonialists are on our horizon. Please do not underestimate their cunning. If they see a void in our borders they will breach it. Please watch this video. It is truly chilling.
    http://www.thenation.com/doc/20100301/klein

    Loading…
46. 

    Anonymous

    February 12, 2010 at 8:14 pm

    
    

    Guyanese are not the only immigrants who have launched attacks against Bajans for rightfully trying to secure our borders. There is a website called BritishExpats. It has a site specifically for expats (not just Brits) who live or want to live in Barbados. Bajans are usually banned from the site when they try to voice their concerns about the issue of immigration. The commenters named Neal and Reslax are supposedly Bajans. Both of them have been banned from the site. The following threads are just two examples of what you will find on that site.

    http://britishexpats.com/forum/showthread.php?t=650858

    http://britishexpats.com/forum/showthread.php?t=651735

    Loading…
47. 

    X-MAN

    February 14, 2010 at 4:00 pm

    
    

    off message

    http://www.nationnews.com/news/local/who-speightstwon-belong-to-copy-for-web

    Loading…
48. 

    X-MAN

    February 14, 2010 at 4:05 pm

    
    

    off message

    http://www.nationnews.com/news/politics/barbados-and-china-sign-double-taxation-treaty

    Loading…
49. 

    Black Nationalist

    February 14, 2010 at 5:06 pm

    
    

    Barbados and other West Indian Nations should copy what Idi Amin did when he ordered the Brown Indians who lived in Uganda 90 days to leave the Country and to seel their homes and buisnesses at rock bottom prices. Barbados and other West Indian Nations should give the White Europeans, Yellow Asians, Brown Indians and Middle Easterners about 90 days to leave and to sell their homes and buisnesses at rockbottom prices also.

    Barbados and the West Indies needs to be a Black African Zone for people of Black African Descent and no one else but us should live here. The West Indies belong to us because we are the majority and the other people should leave and not return.

    90 Days is all the White Europeans, Yellow Asians, Brown Indians and Middle Easterners need to pack up all their belonings, sell their homes and buisnesses and to relocate to either North America, Europe, Asia and Oceania.

    List of Airlines that can transport the White Europeans, Yellow Asians and Brown Indians and Middle Easterners out of Barbados from Grantly Adams International Airport in 90 Days or less.

    Air Canada
    Destinations: Montreal and Toronto

    American Airlines
    Destinations: Miami and New York

    British Airways
    Destination: London

    Delta Airlines
    Destination: Atlanta

    US Airways
    Destinations: Charlotte and Philadelphia

    Virgin Atlantic Airways
    Destinations: Manchester and London

    The sooner that Barbados and the West Indies become 100% Black African the better. We are tired of being treated as 2nd Class Citizens in our own country and it’s time to deport all the non Black Africans from Barbados and the West Indies back to North America, Europe, Asia and Oceania where they belong.

    Loading…
50. 

    Trained Economist

    February 15, 2010 at 8:52 am

    
    

    Prof beckels’ vicious, nasty and personal attack on Prof Howard is the single most anti-intellectual act in Barbados in the last 100 years.

    Shame, shame on the UWI principal.

    Loading…