Cayman officials defend new immigration laws

[Dr.Dudd]

Radio Jamaica News.Mon Oct 9, 2006
Cayman officials defend new immigration laws


Officials in the Cayman Islands are defending a policy which limits how long non-nationals can remain in the country.

The Government has set up a committee which wants to toughen what is called the "Roll Over Law" that sets term limits for non-nationals.

But several non-Caymanians are calling for the law to be scrapped.

Normally a foreigner who has been resident in the Cayman Islands for eight years and over could apply for permanent residency.

But the "Roll Over Law" states that a non-national on a work permit can remain in the island for only seven years one short of the time under which they could become permanent residents.

Though it does also state that some workers in exceptional circumstances for nine years. Such exceptional might be accountants for example.

Officials say nearly half to close 50,000 people living on the islands are foreigners and the “Roll Over Law” is necessary to control immigration.

“Start with the premise that you have 32,000 Caymanians of which over 7,000 acquired Caymanian status or the right to be Caymanian in the last decade,” said Work permit board chairman, David Rich.

“Then when you look at the work permit statistics you have another 24,000 people working here and if you did not have a term limit policy every person of that number, that chose to remain here of their own volition, would in due course become eligible to apply for permanent residence,” he added.

And Mr. Rich said the Cayman Islands just wouldn’t be able to afford the social care bill that would come with an uncapped rise in permanent resident population.

But one expert is dismissing this argument Wendy Ledger, who is the Associate editor of the online news website Cayman Net News told us that this is an emotional response to the issue.

“The key major point is one that we believe is almost racist to be honest as it has become apparent over the last few days that the people that are targeted are Jamaicans predominantly,” said Ms. Ledger.

Secondly we feel that it undermines the potential for economic development simply because, no matter which way you slice it, it is impossible for Cayman to produce a big enough workforce for the amount of vacancies that we have here,” she added.

Clearly with the country split almost evenly between nationals and non-nationals this is a debate that is set to continue for some time yet.

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: Cayman officials defend new immigration laws

Jamaicans targeted to go
Monday, October 9, 2006




David Ritch
Chairman
Work Permit Board


According to Chairman of the Work Permit Board, David Ritch, Jamaicans "by sheer force of numbers" have the potential to "bring the country (Cayman) to a halt."

Mr Ritch was speaking on 6 October 2006 at a forum staged by businesses in the Council of Associations of the Chamber of Commerce.

The objective of the session was to discuss amendments to Cayman's Immigration Law - a document that has the seven-year fixed term limit, Permanent Residency requirements and Exempt Status, in relation to foreign nationals, as key and controversial elements.

Mr Ritch had explained that one of the objectives of fixed-term Work Permits, Permanent Residency, Business Staffing Plans and other elements of Cayman's Immigration Law, would be to move the Cayman Islands away from the current situation where one nationality composes the majority of work permit holders.

Mr Ritch identified Jamaicans as being in the majority here, revealing that of the "7,855 persons who are in Cayman longer than eight years and are eligible to apply for Permanent Residency, more than 5,000 are Jamaicans."

He also said that of the 24,000 Work Permit holders, 11,000 are Jamaicans.

Against this background he added that this group could "bring material pressure to bear" on the running of the country, if, for any reason, they decided, en masse, not to turn out to work.

Mr Ritch also pointed to another situation in relation to Jamaicans, which he viewed as undesirable - identifying that a number of Jamaicans are low-income earners and had the capacity to convert Cayman into a "welfare state."

He said that amongst the 11,000 Jamaican work permit holders, 9,000 were "unskilled labourers - that is janitors, domestics and so on. Factor in that these persons may have two, three, four or five children."

Mr Ritch then speculated that such low-income earners, becoming a permanent part of Cayman's society, would mean a greater financial burden on the Government to provide for them in retirement or in event of ill-health.

He said, "This would be thousands creating a welfare state. Anyone who doesn't understand this is in for a rude awakening."

When Hon Alden McLaughlin, Minister of Education, addressed the forum he also brought numbers to bear on the issue.

He pointed out that in 2001 when the first Immigration Review Team (IRT) began working on the Immigration Law, there were 14,000 Work Permit holders.

Mr McLaughlin said that this number now stood at 24,000, adding that Caymanians were declining in number rapidly.

According to Mr Ritch, it is important to recognise the imbalance in the geographical mix with which these numbers have grown.

Consequently, Mr Ritch also said that one nationality in the majority here would affect the long-term "cultural mix" of the Islands and this too was an undesirable state of affairs.

Hence, one of the areas of the law, which Mr Ritch pointed to as securing a good mixture of nationalities for the Cayman Islands, was Subsection 4c of Section 42 of the amended document - demonstrating that there was now "an obligation on the part of the Work Permit Board to establish a good demographic in Cayman because you can't have the workforce dominated by one nationality."

In his presentation, Mr McLaughlin said that the hard truth about maintaining the strength of the Cayman economy was that "social harmony, concord, and, a feeling of security and safety had to be in place."

On previous occasions he had referred to these elements being eroded because Caymanians were feeling "overwhelmed" by the number of expatriates dominating every facet of life in the Islands.

He said, "An absence of those things (to do with social harmony) are going to affect your bottom lines."
www.caymannetnews.com

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: Cayman officials defend new immigration laws

LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Don't blame Jamaicans for Cayman's flawed policy
Thursday, October 12, 2006

Dear Sir:


I would like to comment on a few points made by David Ritch, Chairman of the Immigration Board at a function held last Friday. Let me begin by saying I have no objection to the Immigration law being proposed.

However, I take umbrage to the following points:

Firstly, it was reported that Mr. Ritch said that the vast majority of persons here over eight years are Jamaicans - particularly the unskilled Jamaicans, who based on their time here it is evident that they do not want to go home.

My question is who granted them permission to remain here for so long?

Do not use a flaw in your immigration policy to blame these persons for being here eight years and over, they did not grant themselves work permits.

Secondly, Mr. Ritch said that these persons if given permanent residency and then status would send for their dependants and the possibility of them becoming a burden on the state is quite high.

From my knowledge unskilled Jamaicans have migrated to many countries and have taken their dependants with them. In many instances they have not become a burden to the state.

In fact if you should observe these groups of people they stand with pride every Friday in the money remittance line to send whatever small earnings they are paid to take care of their family back home, these persons who are being paid a measly sum also go home to their families at every given opportunity.

They also quite frequently go to Foster's and purchase boxes of items for the family back home. There are no reports of these persons becoming a burden to the societies they have migrated to.

Contrary to this there are several reports where their dependants having migrated elsewhere are at the top of their game whether it be academically or in sports, arts etc.

It is quite evident that they are only wanted in these Islands to do the dirty jobs here and construct your castles and your places of business - but they are not welcome otherwise. There is nothing wrong with this just make your immigration policy without trying to demean persons from a nationality.

On another point - it would be nice if the powers that be set a minimum wage so that these persons do not have to come here and live the way they do. What is happening amounts to indentured slavery.

God bless you all.

K. Knight

www.caymannetnews.com

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: Cayman officials defend new immigration laws

Ritch denies accusations
Friday, October 13, 2006



David Ritch
Chairman of the Work
Permit Board


The Chairman of the Work Permit Board David Ritch, has denied accusations that his board and the Immigration Law especially rollover policy are targeting Jamaicans, describing it as wrong and "a tragedy."

Speaking with Cayman Net News on 11 October he said that he would describe the end result of his statements at the 6 October Chamber of Commerce Forum - staged to discuss the proposed restructuring of Cayman's Immigration Laws - as "a clear misunderstanding."

Mr Ritch spoke with Net News about this at the same time that reports were coming into the newspaper that several groups, which attended the Forum, were preparing to make formal statements about Mr Ritch's comments.

One of the representatives that spoke with Net News in this regard was Robert Hamaty of the Jamaican Consulate.

"I know this is a sensitive issue and the Jamaican Consulate is in the process of preparing a response," he said.

Mr Ritch's comments at the Forum composed news reports in both daily newspapers following the large Chamber of Commerce Council of Associations meeting - a host session for the Islands' most powerful group of business leaders.

In its Monday 9 October edition, one publication reported Mr Ritch's words, "Call me callous, call me insensitive. This is an uncomfortable topic and no one wants to talk about it. I am going to talk about it because someone has to talk about it."

Net News, reporting on the following day - entitled "Jamaicans Targeted to go" - quoted Mr Ritch's words relating to Jamaicans having the potential to bring material pressure to bear by bringing the Cayman Islands to a halt by sheer force of numbers.

Mr Ritch stated his objection to the headline, and not the content of this report.

He however severely criticised the newspaper's Wednesday 11 October 2006 Editorial - objecting to being "labelled as a racist and being deliberately misrepresented."

Mr Ritch's comments at the Forum were presented in conjunction with numbers that demonstrated that Jamaicans composed an overwhelming percentage of expatriates in Cayman longer than eight years, and therefore eligible to apply for Permanent Residency.

Mr Ritch said there were problems too with the number of unskilled, low-income earners in Cayman.

He explained that of the Islands' 24,000 expatriate workers, more than 9,000 were unskilled - adding that Jamaicans composed a significant percentage of that unskilled group.

Speaking with Net News he said the issue is that with a large number of low-income earners remaining in the jurisdiction beyond eight years, the country would be obliged to grant Permanent Residency and then these persons could move on to becoming Caymanian.

Mr Ritch added that the children and dependants of these persons had to be factored into the issue as well.

At the Forum, in relation to that point, Mr Ritch had spoken about a high number of low-income earners, becoming Caymanian, having the capacity to change Cayman into a "welfare state."

However, Mr Ritch said there was a misplaced focus in relation to the whole issue.

"I made it abundantly clear that this was a question of numbers and not of a nationality. The point had nothing to do with wanting to get rid of Jamaicans. Nothing could be further from the truth," he said.

"The Immigration Law will not prevent Jamaicans from continuing to work here. We grant permits every Monday and Jamaicans continue to make up a large number of this group."


Back...

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: Cayman officials defend new immigration laws

LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Unskilled or not so unskilled
Friday, October 13, 2006

Dear Sir:


I would like to begin this letter with a simple question to Mr David Ritch: How many more slaps in the face are you going to give us unskilled workers?

First he goes to a talk show and puts us at the lowest level one could find, this even brought up an editorial in this newspaper about what he discussed, but that wasn't enough, then he gets a front page at a local newspaper with even more details and according to him facts, but not all the facts though.

Okay, let's see: out of 24,000 work permit holders on the islands, at least 10,000 are for unskilled workers or work permit numbers if he wants to call us so, and these might represent a serious problem for the island in the near future. What's that? 30 years from now?

Did Mr Ritch know that at least 30 percent of this 10,000 might have a profession or a trade back in their country?

For instance, I'm an accountant back in my country of origin and I'm offered a job opportunity in the Cayman Islands as a gardener. I take it and decide to come here. Well, automatically I fall into the category of unskilled, because I'm working as a gardener. That's why it doesn't surprise me to see my friend, who is a professional lawyer, packing meat in a supermarket, or my next friend who is an engineer doing cash in a convenience store, are these not so unskilled?

The only reason why I wouldn't call Mr Ritch's comments racist or discriminating is because at times he sounds as if he's just articulating or even following orders, but please, Mr Ritch, could you stop for a minute referring to us as third class citizens or work permit files that you can just pack up into a box and just ship out of the island.

We don't come here to beg; we spend money in groceries, we buy gas, we pay rent, we pay light bills and contrary to what Mr Ritch said, we also pay pension and insurance. I must admit, though, that the acts of some expats taint the image of others and make the innocent pay for the guilty; that happens all the time.

Even though my time is almost up in the islands due to this flawed rollover policy, I can proudly say that at least 60 percent of my best friends in the island are all Caymanians. Yes, I heard about Caymanians resenting expatriates; that's completely false, and if you don't believe me just go on a Thursday night to the Next Level night club and see for yourself who's dancing and singing along with expats:

Caymanians....

Caymanians are by far some of the nicest people in the world, their generosity goes beyond borders, from the time I set foot on these islands I fell in love with the Caymanian accent and way of talking, especially the West Bayers.

Some of my favorites are: look here now! Just cool now! Or sweetie pronounced Caymanian style:

"sweetiee". You see, those are some of the things that you leave behind when you have to go, not just a work permit file.

Finally, I want to give the Caymanians one final message: you're all being brainwashed by these politicians, when this rollover policy starts backfiring on the islands, it's not Mr Ritch or the cabinet members that are going to feel it, it is the people of the Cayman Islands in general. Can't you hear in the streets? Can't you see it in the paper everyday? A lot of Caymanians are against this rollover policy, more than you can think of, trust me, bobo.

If this was supposed to get you votes, this is also going to throw away some votes, because from the time all these political parties were formed, anything that happens on the island becomes a political show.

That's why sometimes I get to the conclusion that the reason why the opposition is not saying anything against the rollover is because they might use it as a political weapon when everything falls apart. Too bad though.

Well, without taking much more of your time I urge all Caymanians to open their eyes and decide what they really want and not let themselves get carried away by some politicians that only worry about their personal agendas or check books.

Stewart Martinez


Back...

[Blackstar*]

Re: Cayman officials defend new immigration laws

So, Dr. Dudd, how you never post Mr. Ritch picture?

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: Cayman officials defend new immigration laws

I wasn't aware of the relevance.
Clue me in no. [img]/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[Blackstar*]

Re: Cayman officials defend new immigration laws

I wondered why Mr. Ritch was being "labelled as a racist".

[ QUOTE ]
Net News, reporting on the following day - entitled "Jamaicans Targeted to go" - quoted Mr Ritch's words relating to Jamaicans having the potential to bring material pressure to bear by bringing the Cayman Islands to a halt by sheer force of numbers.

Mr Ritch stated his objection to the headline, and not the content of this report.

He however severely criticised the newspaper's Wednesday 11 October 2006 Editorial - objecting to being "labelled as a racist and being deliberately misrepresented."

[/ QUOTE ]

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: Cayman officials defend new immigration laws

So does his pic makes it different?
Are you suggesting that 'near' blacks,or blacks againct blacks, cannot be racist againt's blacks?
In case you are not aware, race in Cayman is delienated differently from USA just like it is in Jamaica,and many other countries where whites are not the majority.
They create alliances with all the near whites, and they tend to be more agressive at prosecuting the blacks just to prove their worth and maintain their allainces.
That is not to say that he is not simply carrying out a directive given by the government.

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: Cayman officials defend new immigration laws

Jamaicans in a Cayman Jam
Monday, October 16, 2006



Capt. Robert Hamaty


Recent revelations by the Chair of the Work Permit Board Chairman, David Ritch about Jamaicans in particular being the focus of the seven-year term rollover policy, are worrying Jamaican residents here.

In letters to the editor, an advertisement by a consortium of concerned Jamaicans numerous individual residents, and in today's Net News, the Jamaican consulate in Cayman Jamaicans are raising concerns.

One prominent Jamaican resident told Net News that such biases as witnessed recently place persons in a jam.

"Between a rock and a hard place, as we say in Jamaica. Anywhere in the world, throughout time, that biases against population groups have existed - whether for racial, class-type, or other reasons - these groups have had to be exceedingly fearful because, as a consequence, laws, regulations and persons in authority can be manipulated, by the potentates, to act against these groups of persons," added the resident who wished to remain anonymous.

In a full page advertisement, Capt. Robert Hamaty who is the Honorary Consul for Jamaica in the Cayman Islands, said there were grave concerns about the recent comments attributed to David Ritch, the Chairman of the Work Permit Board concerning Jamaicans living in Cayman and asked for an apology.

"The statements have had a negative impact on the Jamaican community who feel alienated and hurt and not sure if this is Government's position or only Mr. David Ritch. The comment that by allowing Jamaican dependants in would cause Cayman to be a welfare state is particularly derogatory and we demand a retraction and an apology from Mr Ritch," Mr Hamaty said.

"It is not in the best interest of any country to alienate a nationality or encourage polarization by means of divisive statements."

Mr Hamaty emphasised the extensive contribution Jamaicans have made to the community and was concerned that those Jamaicans who are now waiting on Permanent Residency could have their applications prejudiced by Mr Ritch's comments.

The Jamaican community at large has raised numerous concerns and one prominent member of the community told Net News that Jamaicans here are now exhibiting a level of fear and nervousness that has never been seen before.

"Most of the Jamaicans, not all lower income, don't even want status here in the years to come. They just want to work and live honourably for a while and then go," he said.

"But they too are living in the hell of fear now about an imbalance in the ways in which they will be treated. They fear writing to the newspaper or participating in forums."

Whether Mr Ritch intended this or not, many of the residents who spoke with Cayman Net News attributed the heightened sense of fear to his words at the Chamber of Commerce Immigration Forum.
One Jamaican did however defend Mr Ritch.

"In my view, Mr Ritch did nothing wrong. In my view, he was only saying what we knew all along but the Government was not willing to say. He has been given a task to reduce the number of Jamaicans here and that's what he is doing. Simple."

Of the two dozen people that spoke with Net News including two members of the clergy, none gave permission for their names to be used.

Some said they had Permanent Residency applications in for processing, others said they were frightened.

"For Mr Ritch to mention the possible locking down of the country's operation, in the same breath with too many large numbers of Jamaicans being here, was frightening," he said.

"When have loyal, dedicated, hardworking Jamaicans in Cayman ever been associated, en masse, with the type of aggression that locking down a country demands?" the anonymous resident said.


Back...

[browning111]

Re: Cayman officials defend new immigration laws

i don't know what the ranting and raving is all about. U get a work permit for 1 year. u keep getting it renewed. One day govt says no more. That courtesy has ended. No reason why they can't pack up and go. They didn't say I had to go, but I chose to go.
Ritch is right. Eg I know i jam who got status, legally he's entitled to bring wife and children under 18 years. Now he bring 2 more children over 18 looking for work permit. Eg a domestic helper with 2 kids 13 and 8, is applying for permanent residency. Her goal is to bring her 2 children. On her salary she can't afford accomodation nor school fees. Then she will turn to social services for help. Wouldn't this be a burden to the caymanian society? .What about the antagonism at school?

Any nationality that large will overcome the caymanians - turning the caymanian into 2nd class citizen. it just happens that Jamaicans are the largest contingent of foreigners. How would jamaicans feel if other west indian nations over ran their country. Isn't the ja govt checking into the work permits to foreigners? not the same topic but the "control" idea is the same.
What hamaty complaining about? His workers are jamaicans and spanish. And I wonder how much he pays?

Most Jmaicans use cayman as a jump off point to apply for visas to england, US and Canada. Many do not even stay for the 7 years. But since cayman will fall witin the EEC human rights guidelines, once a foreigner has stayed for a period of tome , they will be entitled to some form of residency, which will lead to status, which will lead to yje globalization of Cayman. Thus loss of Cayman identity.

There are 2 sides to the story - u just got to pick a side and then feel alienated.

[Dr.Dudd]

Re: Cayman officials defend new immigration laws

The rollover is not the answer
The government says it won't repeal the rollover policy, which is too bad, writes Tad Stoner

The starting point for discussing the rollover policy is that it is designed to stop expatriates from becoming permanent residents. The argument is that, otherwise, Caymanians will lose control of their country. This is senseless, but reflects a fear of what the future holds for these three islands.



The volume of the conversation continues to rise, but so much of it involves an insular exchange among the legions of the persuaded, who know only that they do not want to be overwhelmed by 'foreigners'.



Anyone that can read or hear knows now that most expatriates in the Cayman Islands are Jamaicans. To be sure, native Caymanians do not appear overly worried that Americans, Britons or Canadians will swamp their culture. They worry Jamaicans will swamp their culture.



Just to be clear, this does not make the rollover racist: after all, Jamaicans are not a race, they are a nationality. That makes the rollover both ethnocentric and nationalist. The question before the government and people of the Cayman Islands is what kind of future is shaped by ethnocentricity and nationalism, especially in a community as tiny as this - and the answer must be 'an increasingly limited one'.



That does not appear to daunt our leaders, however. For example, last week, Leader of Government Business Kurt Tibbetts lent his support to the rollover in a formal statement, much of which appeared founded on wishful thinking.



For example, he cited 2003's 3,000 Status grants as bringing community tensions 'to almost boiling point', but ignored what might be described as 'mitigating facts'. Those grants were made to clean up a longstanding mess that threatened to call down a great deal more than tension. The move cleared a backlog of people who had been resident in the Cayman Islands for more than a decade without any immigration controls at all, and who qualified under international law for security of tenure, if not full residency, and who could not simply be expelled.



If the grants had not been made, the George Town government today would face international legal opprobrium and 3,000 more people with legitimate claims to permanent residency. The fact is that Anthony Scott's Permanent Residency Board already faces a 2,000-application backlog. Another 3,000, and the delays implicit in that, and the consequently increased pressure on the Work Permit Board, and the system would very likely choke to death.



Tibbetts said the rollover will 'ensure continued stability, harmony, growth and progress'. In the absence of an ability to see into the future, this statement must represent wishful thinking. Moreover, some perfectly cogent arguments have been made in support of exactly the opposite.



If businesses - large, small, locally owned and foreign owned - and even our own government (whose oft-stated policy is to extend the rollover to the previously exempt civil service) cannot retain people they know, trust and support, then what happens to stability, harmony, growth and progress? Rollover forces every enterprise back to 'square one' as experienced employees depart.



The rollover is not intended to reduce the expatriate population so much as it is to prevent foreigners from achieving the 10-year residency that qualifies them to remain permanently. Expelling them obliges employers either to seek Caymanians or import replacements, who start their own seven-year rollover 'clock'.



The number of Caymanians prepared to occupy skilled, professional positions is simply insufficient to keep the wheels turning, however, to say nothing of driving growth. Meanwhile, the legal tests for exempting expatriates from the rollover are so malleable as to make planning practically impossible, offering little in the way of 'stability'.



David Ritch, the chairman of the Work Permit Board, was plain when he spoke at the Chamber of Commerce immigration forum three weeks ago: permits and the rollover will work in lockstep to limit the preponderance of any single nationality in the workforce and community. If, for example, officials believe too many Jamaicans work here, they are likely to bar others from entering, and as Jamaican employees leave, someone else has to fill the vacancies.



Will a sudden rush of previously suppressed and jobless Caymanians occupy these slots? It seems unlikely (not least, since the unemployment rate in Cayman is so low). It is equally unlikely that employers are going to seek masons and carpenters and ditch diggers and domestic helpers in Zimbabwe or Fiji - or even St Lucia, Grenada or Barbados.



The simple practicalities are that employers want to look to Jamaica, and for good reason: myriad interpersonal connections to Cayman, a long-standing mutual national history, similar culture and physical proximity, not to mention cheaper wages than some Caymanians may be prepared to accept.



The unexamined conceit underlying the numbers argument is that everyone who sets foot in the Cayman Islands wants to remain.



Already, 5,000 Jamaicans have been here at least eight years. The fact, however, is that very few of those people have apparently pursued permanent residency. Yet the thinking appears to proceed as follows: If all 5,000 apply for permanent residency, authorities are flatly obliged to grant it. Then, as night must follow day, all 5,000 will apply for Status, followed, as the moon must circle the earth, by full Caymanian citizenship.



The logic goes on that all 5,000 will immediately import all of their dependants, who will swamp the schools, medical facilities, welfare roles, roads and housing, wrecking Cayman's fragile economy and culture.



And still, as the song goes, there'll be more. All of these people will now want to vote; and because they now comprise sufficient numbers, are now Caymanian and eligible to run for political office, they will elect themselves. And that, as they say, will be that. Caymanians will have lost control of their own country. Cayman will be laid waste. Jamaicans will turn a once-prosperous economy into a welfare state. Cayman traditions, quiet charm, physical beauty, environment, even its native people: gone, destroyed, ruined.



What is to check this juggernaut? One little administrative measure. The rollover will make the islands safe again, secure in a chaotic world. If only real life were ever that simple.