Kaieteur News

PAGE 4

Saturday May 18, 2019

Kaieteur News

Kaieteur News Printed and Published by National Media & Publishing Company Ltd. 24 Saffon Street, Charlestown, Georgetown, Guyana.

Publisher: GLENN LALL Editor: Adam Harris Tel: 225-8465, 225-8491. Fax: 225-8473, 226-8210

EDITORIAL

What’s Missing in Trump’s ‘Beautiful, Bold’ Immigration Plan (Excerpt from a NY Times Editorial) In a Rose Garden address, President Trump on Thursday unveiled his plan “to create a fair, modern and lawful system of immigration for the United States.”

“This is the big, beautiful, bold plan,” Mr. Trump said — one that would not only establish “the most complete and effective border security package ever assembled,” but also effect a “sweeping modernization of our dysfunctional legal immigration process.” These are, to be sure, worthy goals. Unfortunately, what Mr. Trump rolled out was less a transformative reform proposal than another missed opportunity. Immigration is this president’s signature issue, one defined by entrenched, complex problems that call for serious thought, informed analysis and painful compromise.

Instead, the president has produced a political messaging vehicle — a vision statement around which to unify and rally his party heading into next year’s election. Even on those narrow, dispiriting terms, it’s likely to fall short.

Assembled over the past several months by Jared Kushner, Mr. Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser, this proposal does not address some of the thorniest elements of the immigration debate. Most notably, it avoids the question of what to do about the 1.8 million immigrants brought to the United States illegally as children and protected from deportation under an Obama-era program, Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA. No proposal that fails to grapple with this vulnerable population will be taken seriously by Democrats — nor should it be.

The plan also does not address how to bring the roughly 11 million undocumented immigrants living in the United States out of the shadows.

Instead, as the president indicated, Mr. Kushner limited his focus on beefing up border security and reworking the legal immigration system. On border security, the plan sticks with many of the administration’s aims to which Democrats have objected, such as overturning the prohibition on holding child migrants in custody for no more than 20 days, deporting unaccompanied minors back to their home countries, having some asylum-seekers remain in their home countries while their requests are processed and, of course, building the wall.

To help ensure funding for these measures and more, a new “border security trust fund” would be created, financed by fees and other revenue generated at border crossings.

In terms of legal immigration, Mr. Kushner’s plan proposes a “merit-based” system, moving away from the program that gives priority to reunifying families that has been in place since the 1960s. The number of visas granted on humanitarian grounds would be reduced, and the diversity visa lottery would be eliminated altogether.

While family ties would still inform a third of admissions — down from the current two-thirds — the balance would flip overwhelmingly in favor of bringing in highly skilled, high-wage workers. “We discriminate against genius,” Mr. Trump said in his speech. “We won’t anymore.”

Drawing on plans used in Canada, New Zealand andAustralia, Mr. Kushner’s team has devised an elaborate point system to determine eligibility, based on factors like age, academic achievement and employment offers. “To promote integration, assimilation and national unity,” said the president, “future immigrants will be required to learn English and to pass a civics exam prior to admission.” A new type of visa would be created, named the Build America Visa. Shifting legal immigration toward a point system is not an inherently good or bad idea. Congress considered such an approach in 2007 and again in 2013. As with any complex system, the devil is in the details — few of which the administration has yet provided. And any move to sharply prioritize skilled labor over immigrants seeking to reunite with family members or in need of humanitarian aid is certain to prompt a fierce debate over American values.

Even within the plan’s broad contours, there are obvious trouble spots that threaten to divide Mr. Trump’s own party.

Are the Ex-Ministers indispensable or is this an attempt to circumvent the dual citizenship clause?

DEAR EDITOR, I was stunned to see an article in KN on May 15 “Dual citizen ex-Ministers rehired in same ministries.” It is difficult to comprehend the logic use by the president to rehire, not one, but all four of the dual citizens ministers in their respective ministries, from which they had previously resigned. This act of the president does nothing more than make a mockery of our constitution. This is taking political patronage to an unprecedented level at the expense of the state- invoking the disdain of the populace.

Creating four new positions for four persons who had refuse to give service to the Nation without allegiance to a foreign state will not be condoned by the voting public - with impending elections lurking on the horizon. It is a deed mired in

controversy and will not help to inspire faith or support for the Coalition. Why does the President continue to selfdestruct?

During the Second World War, the British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, uttered a phrase - “No man is indispensable”. Since then, that phrase became a yardstick in the hierarchy of leaders around the World.

Granger’s rehiring of the four ex-ministers who had resigned because their dual citizenship was found to be contrary to our constitution, has given the aura of indispensability to his revered quartet. It exposes the less than mediocre qualities of the president relative to the Winston Churchill standard - “No man is indispensable!” The fact that these ex-ministers had an option to remain ministers by

simply relinquishing their foreign citizenship as a show of patriotism, required by our constitution, and did not do so, makes Granger look more lacking in relevance as a president, for rehiring them.

Instead of renouncing their foreign citizenship to show that they have Guyana at heart, these ex- ministers choose to leave an escape route (dual citizenship) from Guyana wide open. It is clearly an indication of their love and respect for their feathered beds in foreign lands. These ex- ministers’ choice of resignation over renouncing has brought into public focus their unpatriotic sentiment. In short, they have chosen their foreign allegiance over service to homeland. In this regard, the President’s act of rehiring these people on the pretext that they are indispensable or anything

else seems profane. It questions his loyalty to uphold and protect the constitution and puts him on par with the quartet. Is the rehiring of these ex- ministers in their respective ministries an attempt to circumvent the constitutional clause on dual citizenship? Whatever the motive, it is an insult to the intelligence of the Guyanese public and a seemingly intended relegation of power of the newly elected ministers. How do the newly elected ex-ministers function in the face of whom they had replace when all that separate the ex- ministers from reclaiming their place is their dual citizenship? This is definitely conflict of interest.

This rehiring act of the President has tarnished the image of the President in an irretrievable way.

Rudolph Singh

APNU+AFC missing in action, as violence against women escalates into a national crisis DEAR EDITOR, Even as we agonise over the gruesome murder of Zaila Sugrim by her intimate partner this past weekend, news is coming out of Essequibo of another woman cruelly stabbed to death by her husband. None of these incidents is the direct fault of the President or his government. But violence against women (VAW), including intimate partner violence (IPV), has further escalated in Guyana and getting worse every day.

Intimate partner violence and deaths are a genuine national crisis, demanding urgent action by the government.

As early as 2006, I called attention to this matter as a global public health challenge. In 2008, Minister Priya Manickchand made the fight against VAW a priority national programme. Exactly one year ago, I wrote about this national crisis and urged our government to act with a sense of urgency. It is distasteful and completely unacceptable that any of us must still urge our government to lead a vigorous fight against VAW. There are many voices calling for action. But without leadership of our government, we will lose the battle to combat VAW and IPV. The sad truth is that this APNU+AFC government is MIA, missing in action, as VAW in Guyana has become a runaway train, leaving too many lives in tatters.

The death of young Zaila Sugrim this past week is, at the same time, a grim reminder that

we are losing the battle against VAW and an urgent call for action. Zaila Sugrim, a beautiful young woman and a mother of five children, is the newest victim of intimate partner violence (IPV) in Guyana, but too many have already preceded her. If her story does not prick our collective conscience, we are not human.

This week, Zaila’s life of domestic violence came to an end, not because she was able to escape her abuser, even though she desperately tried to, but because she was brutally murdered by her abuser-husband. Zaila was mercilessly beaten, shot in the head, burnt and buried in a shallow grave behind her husband’s business. All of this, while her children were excitedly waiting for her to celebrate one of their birthdays. Now these innocent children have become motherless.

Like many thousands in our country and many millions around the world, Zaila was a victim of the violence against women (VAW) pandemic. About one in three women in the world suffer from violence by their own partners. Dozens of these victims in Guyana will end their lives of terror and misery only by death, just as more than 40,000 women around the world this year. Of the 87,000 women globally murdered, about 40,000 of them are killed by a partner.

Zaila Sugrim is now one of them. So too is Farida Khayum of Essequibo, the newest Guyanese victim, who has left three of the newest orphans in Guyana.

The nation is genuinely

shocked and many of our citizens are demanding action.

There has been no word from the Minister of Public Security. He is too busy thinking about men who frequent places where sex workers hang out, while conspiring to replace Moses Nagamootoo as Prime Minister.

There has been no word from the Minister of Social Protection, under whom women affairs falls.

She is too busy politiking. The Minister of Public Health is similarly silent, also too busy with politics and desperately trying to stop Basil Williams from emerging as a Presidential candidate. The Prime Minister, desperately trying to stop Ramjattan from replacing him, is too concerned about dual citizens to even bother about the senseless killing of a woman. The President, as usual, seems too busy doing nothing to even care.

The truth is that the President and his Government are missing in action, MIA, as VAW continues to escalate and the national crisis heightens.

Not so long ago, a man pumped bullets into the head of his wife in a busy Georgetown street. Less than a month ago, a young man drove his car back and fro over his wife. Now the sad and fatal stories of Zaila Sugrim and Farida Khayum. But such brutal attacks on women by their partners are occurring nearly every week in Guyana.

These stories prick our conscience too often. Each time, we are shocked and our conscience tells us enough is enough. But our country moves on, little action is taken, the government

chooses to be MIA, and we await the next death to prick our conscience a little more.

The problem is our leaders seem to be numb by the frequency and the increasing brutality of these murders, that they treat them as just another unfortunate event in the daily grind of life in Guyana.

I heard today during a TV programme, Ms. Gail Teixeira raising the issue and calling on government to lead the fight against VAW and IPV. Ms. Teixeira who led Guyana’s team to the ICPD in Cairo in 1994 has been relentless in demanding more action against VAW. Ms. Priya Manickchand has been an ardent advocate urging a vigorous national effort to combat VAW. Many women and NGOs have been actively working on their own to stem the tsunami of VAW in Guyana. But our present government continues to behave as if VAW is not a matter for concern. Since 2015, the APNU+AFC Government has been either silent or extremely stingy in acknowledging Guyana has a VAW problem and that IPV is an epidemic in our country.

We are not alone. Both VAW and IPV are pandemics, public health crisis, in every country in the world. But our government cannot excuse itself because VAW happens to be a global problem.

Guyana needs action now and the President must step up to the plate.

Dr. Leslie Ramsammy