Column: “Pathways Is The Right Thing To Do”
[Opinion column written by the Minister of Home Affairs Michael Fahy]
One of those who commented on my recent article about Bermuda’s coming demographic crisis suggested that to be better understood, I should speak more from my heart than my head.
I understand what he or she meant, but this is a world full of facts, and at this point in Bermuda’s history, some of the facts we face are not pleasant. All of us have to do what we can to try to make a constructive response to those facts, whether in our personal lives or, in my case, the lives of those I am in public office to help.
From my heart, let me say this: the actions I take as Minister of Home Affairs are all designed to make life better for Bermudians. That’s what I do. I have three born Bermudian children and my brother has two. How absurd would it be for me to want to jeopardize their futures, never mind anyone else’s?
This difficult job is made more difficult, sometimes, by critics who want to deal with all our problems emotionally, without bothering to face the facts at all. Or, sometimes, by critics who are prepared to make things up in order to do little more than gain some political advantage by opposing what the Government does.
Mr Walton Brown, the the Progressive Labour Party MP who has been rallying protesters against the Ministry’s Pathways to Status plan seems to fall into both those categories.
In his campaign, he has been prepared to sacrifice the comfort of ordinary, innocent citizens by such means as the East Broadway demonstration or trampling on the dignity of the House of Assembly. What he thinks he is accomplishing isn’t clear to me – we all know what his opinion is, and the opinions of those who support him. He has made it clear that he feels there can be no real immigration reform without independence.
On social media, he has posted a series of claims about citizenship that he presents as facts. His claims are not facts. They are his opinions, and some of them are just plain wrong.
He claims, for example, that all countries have quotas for the grant of citizenship, by which I guess he means we should do the same thing here. He’s wrong. The grant of citizenship in nearly every country, like ours, is simply a matter of law, and those countries feel that it would be wrong to treat one qualified applicant any differently than another. Some countries do use quotas – and perhaps this is what he is thinking of – for skilled migration programmes, such as the US Green Card or the UK Tier-1 and Tier-2 visas.
He says the OBA focus is not to ensure Bermudians can gain quality jobs in their own country. Wrong. The Ministry of Home Affairs has put in place a substantial and well-known programme to make sure that people can be trained or retrained to fill jobs in the economy, to require employers to be more careful about the process of hiring, and that information about jobs is much more easily available to job-seekers than once it was.
We are light years ahead of the past government in terms of enforcing our immigrations laws. We’ve increased the penalties greatly, and under this Government, people are just not going to get away with thumbing their noses at the law any more. At the end of last year, the Immigration Compliance section was processing 87 cases of immigration violations. Those 87 ongoing cases could result in fines of up to $1 million.
Mr Brown says Pathways is discriminatory under the Constitution because it will result in more whites getting status than blacks. Any lawyer would tell you that that is completely wrong. The Plan allows all people living here for a certain time to apply for status regardless of race, as the Constitution demands.
Mr Brown says that the only vehicle for securing PRC status today is through the Job Makers Act, which applies to senior executives in the private sector.
Actually, the Job Makers Act was introduced in 2011 by the PLP. It’s a very small group of senior executives… we deal with perhaps nine or ten a year. They can get PRC after 10 years. Pathways, which involves a wait of 20 years, deals not with executives but ordinary folk, from the top to the bottom of the demographic scale.
Mr Brown seems to be telling us that he approves the status quo, which favours executives, but disapproves giving Pathways status to less affluent people from the Caribbean and the Azores. Under our Pathways proposal everyone is treated equally. The numbers involved every year will be low and far more racially balanced than quotas, which would involve a cumbersome points process.
The last one of these points of his that I will deal with is his contention that dealing with Pathways as we have done is divisive, and that we should have more dialogue with those who oppose us.
I’d like to make two points. The first is that Pathways is much less divisive than he says. Every poll or survey done in Bermuda has shown the majority are in favour of granting status to long-term residents. His firm is the only one whose survey has measured that support at less than 70%. His poll was conducted in 2000 – Bermudian opinion has shifted significantly in the time since.
I have made considerable efforts to engage the Opposition in dialogue about immigration matters. Mr Brown tries, but has never seemed able to bring his party to the table. They obviously prefer a strategy of drawing red lines in the sand and telling me not to cross them. The tactics of Mr Brown’s campaign against Pathways have the same flavour – his idea of engagement really comes down to me simply agreeing to do what he says.
Let’s face it – Mr Brown’s thinking about this issue may well be affected by the frustration he feels with his own party at the moment. People must be puzzled, as am I, by the way his views on the human rights issue of same sex marriage seem so at odds with his views on the issue of equal rights for long term residents.
Pathways is the right thing to do. I know it in my head, and I know it in my heart.
- Michael Fahy
20 Most Recent Opinion Columns
- 04 Mar: Column: Chris Famous On Immigration Policy
- 04 Mar: Column: Open Letter From Fubler To MP Brown
- 03 Mar: Column: Shared Vision For Our Community
- 02 Mar: Column: Pull Back Proposal Until Next Election
- 02 Mar: Column: “Our Population Is Shrinking Rapidly”
- 25 Feb: Column: Fundamental Themes Of 2016 Budget
- 25 Feb: Column: Most Important Statements In Budget
- 24 Feb: Lifestyle Column: “The 13 Mile End Goal”
- 24 Feb: Column: Attorney-General On Pathway To Status
- 24 Feb: Column: Decrease Of Bermudians Filling Jobs
- 23 Feb: Column: Benefits Of ‘Pathways to Status’ Initiative
- 23 Feb: Column: Person Holding Opinion Is A “Bigot”?
- 23 Feb: Column: Do Not Set ‘Dangerous’ Precedent
- 23 Feb: Column: Govt Must Engage In Real Consultation
- 21 Feb: Column: Key Is Choosing Growth Going Forward
- 21 Feb: Column: ‘Lay Out The Facts’ On Labour Relations
- 21 Feb: Column: “Looking Under The Hood” At Budget
- 18 Feb: Column: “Overspending Has Not Improved”
- 18 Feb: Column: Questions For Preserve Marriage Group
- 17 Feb: Column: MP Roban On OBA & Labour Relations
Opinion columns reflect the views of the writer, and not those of Bernews Ltd. To submit an Opinion Column/Letter to the Editor, please email info@bernews.com. Bernews welcomes submissions, and while there are no length restrictions, all columns must be signed by the writer’s real name.
-
Read this message people. Forget about the messenger because the facts are clear. How can anyone be against this?
“Actually, the Job Makers Act was introduced in 2011 by the PLP. It’s a very small group of senior executives… we deal with perhaps nine or ten a year. They can get PRC after 10 years. Pathways, which involves a wait of 20 years, deals not with executives but ordinary folk, from the top to the bottom of the demographic scale.
Mr Brown seems to be telling us that he approves the status quo, which favours executives, but disapproves giving Pathways status to less affluent people from the Caribbean and the Azores. Under our Pathways proposal everyone is treated equally. The numbers involved every year will be low and far more racially balanced than quotas, which would involve a cumbersome points process.”
Tackle the current issues First and I am Sorry but there are way more pressing issues to deal First !!!
If circumstances were better then I could back Pathways but the idea of Putting everyone else First I can not support.
A “Better Bermuda for All Bermudains First!!!”
Once we have OUR house in Order then and Only then should we push for pathways for Guest
This is a ridiculous response. Do you even read what the facts are?
This allows us to have more hands on deck to get our house in order.
precisely, how many of these PRC are on financial assistance, at Westgate or Women’s prison? get a grip Bermudians and stop being so hateful and divisive. these people have made contributions to Bermuda over the long haul and should be worthy of obtaining Bermuda status.
But you do understand that if these people leave, then MORE Bermudians will lose their jobs. Is that what you really want for your countrymen?
If a pot washer, waiter, landscaper or nanny left, Bermudians would lose there job?
Bermudians have no desire to fill those position because we feel that it is beneath us to do so. FACT
No, the net impact there would be 0 to Bermudians, since they would just bring in another ex-pat after advertising 3 times trying to get Bermudians to show up to an interview.
Yes.
That is the most laughable thing I’ve read all day like the restaurant would close at the loss. The first order of business is to fix the hiring practices of employers and their preference of expats over Qualified (again qualified) Bermudians. Then any administration that decreases the budget for education also needs addressing (unless they want us to be dumb they work for the Bermudian people right!?) Then the cost of living need to be addressed. IMO
LOL
In certain hospitality businesses, losing an employee like a pot washer may or may not threaten that business. But if you are down pot washers, or waiters or other similar low-skilled workers in, say, a restaurant or bar, then that establishment’s very existence may be threatened, and with it, Bermudian jobs.
In the short term, it might be possible to hire a Bermudian to fill the vacancies or to get another guest worker in on a work permit. But not replacing those jobs in a timely manner can very much threaten that business.
But what’s more important is not just the individual but rather to consider the loss of foreigners in the aggregate. Just think about (1) how much they are paying into our tax revenue and social services, (2) how little they are taking out compared to, say, a retired Bermudian with chronic health conditions such as diabetes (their median age are way younger than Bermudians), and (3) the aggregate demand for goods, housing and services that they need which would disappear overnight. Take away the economic multiplier effect and then think about how many Bermudian jobs would be affected.
First off if the business is relent on forging workers there is a flaw in the business plan unless you are some how guaranteed the permits will be granted or renewed ahead of application so sounds like an investigation is warranted. The rest of your argument is already understood ie taxes stated that above (did you read or just shoot from the hip) I’m more concerned about jobs where qualifications are required and that Bermudians (read qualified) are given the first real shot at the job and that the immigration department is doing their diligence. I know to many Bermudians (qualified hate that I have to keep typing this as people seem to really think Bermudians aren’t qualified) who are being forced to leave the island to seek work unlike the foreigners who make a decision to work here. I know people who have CPCUs and cant find work here care to address that or are you satisfied with pot washers applying for key status??
LOL maybe you are as your name states and don’t care cause redundancies don’t effect you.
Yes, yes, yes, and yes. You see these people have been here on work permits for years. Which means that either no Bermudians applied for their jobs or no Bermudians were qualified for the job. If they all leave it doesn’t open jobs for Bermudians it actually results in the closure of the business, which causes Bermudians to lose their jobs. There is a double whammy in that if these foreign workers leave they (and their families) are no longer frequenting restaurants and grocery stores, which leads to their closure too, which costs more Bermudian jobs.
How do I know this? Because 3,500 foreign workers have already left. Did this result in 3,500 Bermudians stepping into these jobs? No. Almost 3,500 Bermudians LOST their jobs.
I’m not even going to start going into the demographic time bomb that is going off in front of you. Closing schools, spiraling health care costs, bankrupt pensions – any of this sinking in?
@jus! Askin’
What makes you think Bermudians want landscaping,pot washers ,nannys ,waiters’ ?
Not in any way I am saying that they can’t cause I know. They can if not better they just don’t want to do it any time it involves split shift that’s completely out for them ,,landscaping jobs pushing a stupid mower on a hot sunny day long hours@17 dollars an hour in my country ,lol you lead by example ,,nannys job put up with other people’s kids I can barely put up with mines and again split shift…no non no and at the end of the day I fully agree with them for not wanting those jobs,,but again many people need those that want to do it so don’t be quick to pick on eighther one…..
Frankly, yes, these people still eat, bathe, consume electricity, need transportation, etc…
And how many of those are eligible for status?
You do realize this is part of putting the house in order…Please get educated and understand the big picture.
Personally, I’m not a fan of immigration changes, but even I realize what is happening to our country and what our country needs for us all ! The pathways makes sense, and I will swallow my personal preference because of the bigger picture and the need for all.
Look I do see the logic. More people more people to tax, pay into pensions, etc. Totally understand it. Should we not also look into improving the quality of children we produce from schools and or coaching people out of school such as the brothers program just launch but on a island wide scale…
LOL
Producing better Bermudians through the school system is all fine and well in theory, by the practice is much harder. Try as any government might (and the PLP should know this even if they won’t admit to it) you can only help people to improve if they first want to improve themselves, so the government can only go so far. They are fighting an uphill battle when there are children who simply aren’t encouraged to learn, either from lack of parenting support or just straight up bad parenting. Education is a long term strategy, and it’s results will only manifest in the long term, but we also have immediate issues so they also must employ immediate strategies too, and immigration reform is an immediate issue and will have a more immediate effect.
Perhaps if every proposal put forward by the government weren’t attacked and criticized with no constructive suggestions put forward, so that each issue is a distracting, frustrating uphill battle, maybe there would be some energy left over to get on with some of the other pressing issues.
Your response is devoid of the fact that as the minister of immigration. He is dealing with the issues on his plate… this is why there are ministers and ministries, so that there isn’t 1 or 2 people trying to focus on everything; and immigration reform is is one of he most pressing issues for the ministry of immigration. And the ridiculousness that this is putting other first over Bermudians if emotional nonsense, we Bermudians are already here and first, this is just getting others who have long been productive and contributing members of our country/community and have earned the right to have their say in their home up there with us.
“Speak from your heart and not from your head”
The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? Jeremiah 17:9
I think many people have a misconception of the protest.
The problem is the ‘Pathways to Status’ immigration policy should not be a dictatorship by a single party who have their own motives and agenda, wether it is the PLP or OBA. That is the bigger injustice.
The protesters or members of the opposition are not saying that people who have been here for 15-20 should not get PRC or Bermudian Status. I could be wrong, but I’m sure this is not their arguement. Point out a sign or PLP person who has said this. This government and their supporters are like the republian party in the US, spread misinformation!
All people are asking for is a bipartisan approach to reform immigration. Why not have comprehensive immigration reform? How about putting something in place that limits people staying here that long to get status? How about immigration reform that seriously tackles people overstaying their time? How rewriting law they seriously punishes business that illegally hire and expose these businesses? Immigration reform that deals with job hopping while still on work permits? How about immigration reform on how government issues work permits?
The only thing this government is proposing is a ‘Path to Citizenship.’ Their ‘Path to Citizenship’ plan does not deal with the other areas of immigration and does not tackle why people have been here for 15 or 20 years in the first place. People washing dishes for that long, when Bermudians have applied for these jobs and told they are not qualified. We need a bipartisian comprehensive immigration reform that deals with these issues.
In the Cayman Islands since 2001 or 2002 to last year, I remember reading this as I also follow Cayman news from time to time, over 10,000+ people have been granted some sort of status. It is gotten to the point where most of these people are employed and most cayman people are unemployed. The number of expats migrants have grown so large on the islands, the general perception is the expats have a bigger voice on political issues than the Cayman people. We are too small to have the same thing happen here. Right now there is no limit to the number of people that can get status here…this is not good.
In the United States of America, a bi-partisan group of eight Senators who wrote the 2013 comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) bill. The ‘Gang of Eight’ comprised of four Republicans and four Democrats. You hear a lot about the Gang of Eight during this election year. But the point is a bipartisan approach.
What is wrong with a bipartisan approach to immigration reform? It ensures that the PLP can’t have it all their way and the OBA can’t have it all their way and the two will have to comprise to come up with an immigration policy that works best. This approaches limits any motives/agenda that either party has towards immigration such as stacking the deck in their favour in terms of votes or the like.
We can still grant these people status, but we can do this alongside having a comprehensive bipartisan approach to immigration reform. Replace the biassed ‘Path to Citizenship’ plan with a bipartisan immigration plan.
Why a bipartisan approach to immigration? Because that is the right thing to do.
There are a few items wrong with your statement, but the first answer to your question of why cant there be bipartisan reform…because the PLP won’t allow it, or more precisely the PLP leadership. Immediately after being elected leader, Marc Bean swore that there would be no collaboration with the OBA. Mr. Brown can demand bipartisan reform all he wants, but with out leave from his leader to do so, he is powerless to represent his party; and by all accounts from his statements, it’s not bipartisan reform he wants, it’s his reform he wants. And the PLP’s misinformation machine runs far better than the OBA’s, so be wary in your analogies, as the PLP have far more in common with the Republicans than the OBA does.
Now for the comprehensive reform, this is what is being done, it is just not being done all at once. It is being done as they go through, and sometimes certain issues are being thrust forward of others by other factors, such as legal cases.
As for the protestors, I am sure there are some who think there should be bipartisan reform, but there are also those there who are known to not wish any sort of pathway to be available, they might not be holding signs, but they know they are a minority in this thought and are simply riding the coat tails of those that do want reform as means to an end of stalling any progress.
Bipartisan would be a better way to go, so if the protestors truly want this, they need their next stop to the steps of Alaska Hal to demand their boss publicly renounce his ban on collaboration with the OBA, nominate some representatives for the PLP and publish their own ideas for reform… all 3 of these of course require the PLP to genuinely wish a bipartisan relationship… remember, it was the OBA who invited the PLP to join in their cabinet after the election, and who rejected that bipartisan bid.
How would they now allow it when they are calling for it.
So if the government passes a motion or whatever the official term is in the house to set up a committee to come up with a bipartisan comprehensive reform and the PLP reject it then we would know where they stand.
In the US, they had 4 Republicans and 4 Democrats known as ‘The Gang of 8′ to come up with an immigration reform. Here we can have something similar. Three people from each side and two of the independent senators or whatever the makeup of the committee can be.
But you’re not being honest. The PLP have worked with this government on many policies and initiatives. I don’t think what you are saying is being totally honest. I understand people have so much hatred for the PLP but I don’t care about party affiliations.
When I look at other countries in the past several years working on and passing bipartisan immigration reform, we can do it too. It’s not all the PLP. I don’t think he needs to renounce anything, the actions of the PLP working with the government and passing bills with the government is proof that he is okay working with the OBA.
A bipartisan approach to immigration is something the people want and any right thinking, law abiding citizen should want this too. It removes the motives/agenda of one party making all of the immigration laws, and a bipartisan committee will require both sides to compromise and no one would be able to have it all their way.
I don’t like to be unfair, forgive me if I’m wrong about my following assessment.
I gather your ANTI-PLP. If this is the case then think about bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform this way.
If the PLP were the government, would you be comfortable and okay allowing the PLP to pass any immigration law and policies they want without requiring them working with the OBA?
The PLP did pass immigration amendments without consultation. Numerous ones actually. Where were you?
Your opening assertion is based entirely on the premise that the PLP is genuine about collaboration… could be that Mr. Brown is, but until Mr. Bean renounces his pledge to not collaborate with the OBA government, Mr. Brown doesn’t have the authority to demand collaboration. And the PLP have made their position clear in the past, they will not grant status… and there can’t be reform without a pathway to status. So in your hypothetical of a PLP government, I would not support them in a unilateral immigration policy, and there would be a unilateral method to them as they have never done it any other way, because I believe there must be a pathway to status.
Am I anti-PLP, right now yes, but there is 2 reasons for this; 1) I am anti-party membership, 2) the PLP have promised to take us back down the same course they had us on pre-2012, and I am not willing to allow any party to give our country away to foreign creditors. At least with the OBA’s pathways, those ‘foreigners’ are in fact locals and deserve a chance at a piece of this island and the right to have a say in its future
And where did the Gang of 8′s efforts at reform go?
Nowhere, because of rabidly anti-immigration Tea Partiers in the GOP caucus.
If the point you are making is that bipartisan efforts at reform would ensure greater community buy-in to immigration reform, then I think you need a different analogy there.
Oh well. Let’s just let the OBA do whatver they want. Then when the PLP are the next government let’s just allow them to do whatever they want.
Also, the PLP can’t join their cabinet. They might have invited a few PLP members to join the PLP party can’t join the OBA government.
Let’s be honest. The only reason why the OBA would have invited a few members to the OBA cabinet is so they could weakean the opposition. They were playing politics.
When they couldn’t get any PLP members to join they weakened the PLP by giving Mr. Horton the Speaker position.
Cabinet and the speaker is something different, it is perfectly possible to have an opposition member in cabinet… unheard of, but not impossible, and certainly would weaken the opposition any because that person would still be a member of the opposition, Whether senator or MP
Plans and deals are made long before the first vote is cast. GO FIGURE.
“The protesters or members of the opposition are not saying that people who have been here for 15-20 should not get PRC or Bermudian Status. I could be wrong, but I’m sure this is not their arguement. Point out a sign or PLP person who has said this.”
Unless Coffee is trolling, he implies this below in the comments: “#6. If you want to become a Bermudian , the law says , as it stands , marry a Bermudian !”
That is one person. Look at the message on the signs of the protesters. Listen to the message from the opposition.
It’s about having a bipartisan comprehensive immigration policy that most democratic countries have. It’s about not allowing EVERY and ANYBODY, going forward being about to stay for 15-20 years especially doing jobs that Bermudians can do.
In other countries in certain industries, they are not allowed to hire any foreign workers doing certain jobs. Jobs like waiter/waitress, dishwasher, landscaper, receptionist, fisherman, etc.
Why can other countries have a comprehensive immgration policy but not Bermuda?
Most comprehensive immigration proposals around the WORLD in that past several years focus on some of the following immigration issues.
Increased border enforcement – this can include, work permit enforcement, customs at the airport, tackling people overstaying their visas/work permits, etc.
Instituted verification requirements – for employers to ensure they are not hiring unauthorized workers,
Increased visas for high-skilled workers – this means jobs that Bermudians can do should not allow guest workers. This is the case in other countries.
Protection for guest workers- Look at job ads. Some ads such as Live In Housekeeper, Live in Cook, etc. Look at what these people want the job applicants to do. It’s close to slavery. Who are the people getting hired for these jobs – guest workers. I bet these guest workers are getting paid very little to work like a slave. Comprehensive Immigration form would PROTECT GUEST WORKERS!
COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION REFORM IS THE OPPORTUNITY TO THINK INNOVATIVELY AND EXPANSIVELY ABOUT THE REAL NEEDS OF THE COUNTRY AS WELL AS THE NEWCOMERS!!!
Tell me, what is wrong with having a bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform that includes a Pathway to status.
Two things “bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform”. Its a buzz phrase, means nothing.
Second would the PLP ask the OBA to contribute if they were in power? Course not.
Shut this guy down – he is not an elected official. He certainly should not be a Minister of a portfolio this important. This man has contempt for this population.
Neither was Col. Burch and yet you said nothing.
Just say what you really mean.
He loves Bermuda and is a strong believer in its people.
To think otherwise would be wrong.
Dear Mr. San George,
Have you had the opportunity to speak directly with “this guy” and to get a sense first hand about how deeply he cares for Bermuda and why this issue is important?
Your view may not agree with his and hat’s totally ok, you should try it though as you might be surprised at what you learn–but from my discussions with the Minister–his committment for the development of this country was clear and unwavering.
And before I get attacked as a OBA’er–I could give a rats about either party as there are people within each who I think are useless and an emarrasement to every right thinking person of this day and age–but there are some people that actually do care and are headed in the right direction.
I can only imagine that since you are commeting you care deeply for our blessed island–I urge you to talk to Minister Fahy, contempt is not the word at all–more like caring.
Give him a chance, an honest chance–you might be surprised how closely aligned your interests are in relation to the future of Bermuda.
Sometimes its really hard to see through the fog of one’s personal views–but that should never stand in the way of trying to understand every side of a situation.
Please try.
Have a blessed day!
@SAN GEORGE,,, What is this fear you have ? Is it that the OBA are taking Bermuda forward and the PLP could not and would not. And while I`m here, I was the boat show 2 weeks ago and saw a motor yacht for sale calles “GOMBAY DANCER” FOR SALE FOR 3.4 MIL. Wasn`t yours was it???
New Drinking Game
Every time You read ‘Mr. Brown’ in this article take a shot
Ya gonna get tapped bie
Just pass it already we are with you
Too bad they will most likely punk out and put it to a refferendum like they did with the other issue. Cowards
Eloquent, informative and incisive Minister Fahy. Thank you.
That’s like saying Bob is Warm (smile). He is. He just has a tough job.
#1 Micheal The Usurper should never have this Ministry , The Fox is guarding the henhouse !
#2 The strategy of this unhealthy government is to create chaos amongst this peaceful docile community and then offer an untenable solution .
#3. The Premier of this country Micheal Dunkley has acted like a wise serpent by laying low as the population fights against HIS DIRECTIVE .
#4. Tell me , why make Bermuda buy the cow when we are getting the milk for free ? No responsible government does this .
#5. Hundreds of foreigners are about to hit the jackpot , the lottery of their life in addition to already having made more money and lived a superior lifestyle then they could have ever imagined in their native country …. Bermudians and Bermuda made that happen for them , if that wasn’t the case then on their own volition . So that’s a fact !
#6. If you want to become a Bermudian , the law says , as it stands , marry a Bermudian !
If that wasn’t the case , they would have left Bermuda on their own volition . No one stays in a foreign country were the locals treat them badly .
No, because fortunately there are enough of us who understand and value their contribution to counter the ridiculous and hateful messages from ungrateful idiots like you coffee. Start doing something useful and pass me the sugar….the coffee is bitter.
87 cases of immigration violations! What the fuschnickens!!! That’s a crap load of cases and you want to make residents of 15 – 20 years PRCs. How many of those cases involve permit holders who have been here 15 – 20 years? Shouldn’t at least 15 – 20 years PRC idea be suspended until you find out?
It is unlikely that many, if any, would involve PRC’s. Also if any of those involved in past, current or future cases were eligible for PRC under the proposed new pathway, they would be ineligible as they would have a legal standing against them, and they are required to be of good standing for their application for PRC or even Status in order for their application to be reviewed.
I don’t think they would involve PRCs. I have no issues with PRCs, their spouses or their children getting status. What I’m talking about is the idea of making those ordinarily residence for 15 – 20 years PRCs. How many of them are part of the violations? 87 cases is a large number for a small place. The minister should hold off on ordinarily residence for 15 – 20 years until all violations are dealt with.
Again, if they have committed violation that would negate them from eligibility for status advancement, whether it be PRC or citizenship.
Wtf is wrong with you people I’m serious…I’m just lost for words…I can’t believe the ignorance which abounds the “Bermudian” populace…I and many others feel like we’re living in an episode of “Final Destination”…you will understand what I mean if you have seen this film.
Min Fahy – Logic has no place in this debate. Otherwise an excellent piece.
Why mention that your three children are bermudian.
In that manner, were you and your brother born in bermuda ?
Were your parents born and raised in bermuda ? (before IB)
There is a very important reason why bermudians simply say NO. (I expect more bermudians will join-in)
Older bermudians can explain to it you best… it is real simple.
But you must listen
Every Country in existence has its personality that shocks us to reality and believe it or not advances us by his presence,and his absence ,because his presence is a shock to us leaving us with our mouths open saying.what the hell is happening.?His absence from us after he is gone leaves us saying .What the hell just Happened.?In sober reflection after we reflect on it we say .Never again. Welcome aboard Michael Fahy.Peace.Thanks for the Super Shock.
Fahy you are full of it. You’ve been that way for a long time. Especially after the moment you convinced yourself that being versed in law somehow gives you the freedom to rationalize any particular interpretation of something that fits your agenda. Your government has been nothing short of transparent in its selective willingness to accept true democracy as a path forward on matters YOU KNOW the masses are sensitive. Gaming… Yeah Referendum, uhh never mind! Referendum on pathways to status… Uhh heck no, why would we take a chance with that before the election! Gay marriage, yeah… Reforendum… Because we soooo concerned about the uncertainties around putting in through in the house. YOU GUYS ARE FULL OF CRAP! Everyone knows this push on your part to create more voters… err “bermudians” is part of a plan that was established, as per a proven-to-exist doctrine, the minute you sellouts came into government. And if you think things are heating up now, I hope your happy w the mess you cause when you do inevitably shove another piece of unpopular legislation down our throats.
One of the lessons my clients had to learn was that no-one MAKES us do anything. We ourselves make choices about what we do, how we react to things. To blame someone else for our choices, to say they MADE us do something, is to give our power away, and to abdicate responsibility for our actions.
Head Talk, talks at people or over their head. Heart Talk, talks to people, and listens to their opinions. To start with, We need to talk to the Representatives of the other 49 % of our population. That means Mr. Walton Brown and the PLP. We need to Respect people . Even though what we are doing will create jobs and benefit all Bermuda , without talking to people, we leave them to form an opinion that’s incorrect. The dis-connect is with our communication. We must take the lead, and not leave it to others. Some sample facts: 1960’70’80 Census shows that we allowed into Bermuda 5 whites for every 1 black . So some people do have concerns that this is a push to get more white votes. Again, when you talk about racial balance, the figures speak for themselves. The OBA once had their hand on the pulse of the people , but we lost it. Let’s find it again by talking to the people and listening to their concerns.
So, let’s turn it around…if the PLP in the past had suggested such immigration reform right before an election when they were in power…like “let’s allow all the people who have lived in Bermuda illegally for the past 15 years (i.e. the Jamaicans, etc) and all of their children be granted status because it is the right thing to do” how would that make the opposition feel? Wouldn’t they also want a bi-partisan solution?
Seeing as an election is at least a year, maybe more away, your point is lost.
Now, if the OBA had brought this proposed legislation just before the bi-election, I could see what you are saying.