Cameron’s proposal sounds a lot like transatlantic trade !

It would appear to me that the mentality of the British today is not very different from what existed during the time of the transatlantic slave trade.

In the former the UK went to Africa, paid money to the African leaders in exchange for Africans being shipped off to work to enrich the UK Government.

200 years later, they come up with this new plan where some of whom were working and paying taxes in the UK have gotten in trouble with the UK laws are to be sold to their country of origin.

In this new transatlantic trade, the UK will provide money to build a new prison and then give us to money to re-integrate them into the Jamaican society.

In other words, they are be sold back to Jamaica, but in this case they are paying us to take them.

The Jamaican government appears to have agreed on how much they are worth and is willing to ” run wid it “.

Why don’t they keep them their and “re-integrate” them into the UK society.

Advertisements

12 Responses

  1. Why don’t they keep them?

    Simple. They are not obliged to re-integrate delinquent NON-CITIZENS into their own society. Non-citizens do NOT belong to their society.

    If a large number of Cubans came here to work and then a subset of them got convicted of various crimes including drug related crimes (some of them being violent crimes), would you support Jamaica allowing those convicts to remain in Jamaica when they had no Jamaican citizenship and made no steps to take out Jamaican citizenship and renounce their Cuban citizenship even when eligible to do so?

    How do you integrate someone into your society who seemingly has no desire to take up and fully embrace that most visible demonstration of belonging to a society, i.e. your citizenship?

    Do you remember those Jamaicans (Messrs Bogle and McKenzie) who came to visit Jamaica (one for vacation and another for a funeral) and got stuck because they didn’t possess British citizenship despite being in the UK since freaking 1962?! How many more Jamaicans do you think are like that? Living in the UK for DECADES without taking up citizenship and just living life kind of blithely oblivious to the necessity to fully integrate into society (and in the case of some to actually follow the laws of a society)?

    You know what? I’ve heard “Jamaicans” in the diaspora (who do not have Jamaican citizenship by the way but are merely eligible for it as a result of being Jamaicans by descent) complain about how they are treated like foreigners at immigration (Duh! When you flash your Yankee passport then immigration gonna treat you like a Yankee) but that all these Chinese and Indians are treated like locals (newsflash: many of these Chinese and Indians actually take out Jamaican citizenship and thus have Jamaican passports when they arrive at immigration counters in Montego Bay and Kingston)

    Why is it that other peoples have no problem taking up citizenship in the countries they migrate to (even when the country they migrate to is Jamaica), but many of these Jamaicans in the UK seem to be quite content with just living there as guests? Note; they are GUESTS, and guests by definition do not belong to the place they are staying in. And when a guest does something wrong they can become UNWELCOME GUESTS and the host has EVERY right to ask such guests to leave.

    Even the US acts similarly to the UK here: http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/grounds-deportability-when-legal-us-residents-can-be-removed.html

    “Although people who carry nonimmigrant visas or green card holder have the right to be in the United States, such rights depend entirely on them following certain rules and avoiding certain types of legal violations. The U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act (I.N.A.) sets forth numerous grounds upon which a non-citizen may be deported (removed) back to the person’s country of origin.”

    Contrast these Jamaicans who are to be sent home with the recent cases of persons who were deported from the US but were able to return because they were eligible to be US citizens (and US citizens cannot be deported or refused entry into the United States).

    If many of these Jamaicans had become British citizens then they would indeed be Britain’s problem. But for those that could do so but chose not to, they are NOT Britain’s problem but our own.

  2. I fully agree with you with respect to the Jamaicans who lives overseas for decades and are entitled to citizenship but have not take it up. These folks who left in the 1960’s are plainly uninformed and are of the belief that they are in fact UK Citizens even though they do not posses a UK Passport.

    In fact may have no passport at all, because in their minds they have no need for one.
    Mr Bogle for example only got a passport when he was ready to come Jamaica, because he was told he needed one.

    They have so isolated themselves in the UK and have failed to try and understand the immigration laws that many more will suffer the same faith as the two you mentioned.

    These folks do not read the news, they simply work and go back home and have no idea of what is going on.

    In relation to green card holders, I believe these people are a lot more aware of what is required to take up citizenship and I do believe a lot more have done so, than the people who have legal right to remain in the UK.

    I am also of the opinion that Jamaicans in the USA,knows the immigration system very well and knows that being a green card holder is not the same as being a citizen and things such as traffic violation could see you losing that status.

    Finally those convicted of crime in UK are not out problem, until they have completed their sentence in the UK, until such time, they are UK problem and not ours.

    • Yes, Jamaicans in the USA seem to understand the immigration system a bit better than those in the UK, but that is still relative as those attorneys that helped those siblings to return to the US as citizens after being deported years ago noted that many more such deportees might in fact have been eligible for US citizenship. So clearly quite a few do not understand the immigration system and is quite likely that some also just go there and do not bother to inform themselves about the laws (or having gone there without the intention to respect laws anyway, would never have the thought occur to them to utilize the law to their own benefit by following the legal requirements to become citizens)

      With regards to those convicted of crimes in the UK not being our problem – they should NOT be our problem until after they have completed their sentence in the UK I agree, but the UK is in a very strong position to MAKE them our problem whether we are ready for them or not. When you are in that kind of situation, realistically speaking any cost-benefit analysis is only going to be about finding the least worst option as opposed to finding the right/ideal option.

      • We should do the maths and then use that as part of our negotiaions. The UK did just that, don’t you think they did.

        We may not have VERY strong position, but let’s at least exercise it vs bending over and taking it you know where.

        That’s what I am saying here.

        • Well it sounds like someone did some math on our part since the 60% of the funding required on our part is supposed to come from the sale of the older prisons.

        • That is just not possible. The new prison cannot hold our own plus the numbers coming from Britain, so the maths done is incomplete or just plain wrong

        • I didn’t say the math was done with regards to the number of prisoners. I said SOME maths must have been done at some point as I was alluding to the maths concerning the cost of the prison and the proceeds from the sale of the old prisons.

          Yes, it seems whack that the new prison would be expected to hold our current population plus transferred prisoners. But as new details emerge, I’ll wait and see what the full plan is before jumping to conclusions. It might well be that by 2020 the number of British prisoners is expected to be less than the current 900+ Jamaicans incarcerated there by virtue of some having completed their sentence and being released and deported and perhaps new convicts just being deported without serving time anyway.

          If that is the case then it might well be that this prison transfer deal ends up being transitional in nature if the UK expects to drastically reduce the number of Jamaicans it imprisons in the UK in the future through measures to just deport them right away. No future UK prisoners = no future transfers.

        • You think our Government will provide full disclosure. At this stage I/we can only run the analysis on what we see before us. If new information becomes available then my position can change, but as it is now, what is before me is simply not workable in relation to what the minister said.

          It was his statement that was/is being analyzed and until he changes that, then that’s all we can go on.

        • Well while we were debating this around October 1-2 the government had already provided more disclosure on the contents of the MOU from September 30:

          http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/Gov-t-outlines–25-m-prison-deal

          Highlights:

          – The Ministry of National Security this morning issued a release outlining the £25 million deal with the United Kingdom to build a prison here that would see up to 300 Jamaicans currently imprisoned in the UK completing their sentences here.

          “Provision would be made for up to three hundred Jamaicans serving prison sentences in the UK, and subject to deportation at the end of their sentences, to be transferred to this new prison to complete their sentences” the release said.

          so it seems that there is going to be a cap on the number of prisoners transferred at 300 and based on what I read elsewhere it could be less as Jamaica would be able to refuse certain prisoners

          – The Government has signed a non-binding Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the UK to improve the conditions under which prisoners are held in Jamaica, consistent with best practice and international human rights standards, through the construction of a maximum-security prison here, the ministry explained.

          According to the release, the new facility would accommodate between 1,500 and 2,000 inmates…

          well the MOU is non-binding which would mean Jamaica could cancel the deal at any point in time. The new facility seems inadequate in terms of space

          – Some important elements of the MOU are:

          * The Government of the UK has committed to a grant of Twenty Five Million British Pounds for the construction of the new facility and a further Five and a Half Million British Pounds towards the reintegration and resettlement of prisoners. At current exchange rates these commitments equate to approximately Five and a Half Billion Jamaican Dollars.

          £5.5 million pounds for 300 prisoners comes out to approximately £18,300 or US$27,850+ per prisoner. In another post you noted that it cost US$9,580.98 per prisoner per year to keep them. Assuming that “reintegration and resettlement” means resettling them in prison in Jamaica and reintegrating them into society through programs in prison, then the amount the British are going to provide should cover the cost of upkeep for the prisoners for 2-3 years (which might well be the time left on their sentences)

          * The Jamaican Parliament would have to pass framework legislation to allow for a prisoner transfer agreement to be signed with the UK. It is anticipated that every prisoner transfer request under the new legislation and agreement would be subject to both an administrative and judicial review process in Jamaica.

          So nothing to happen unless new legislation is passed and it would still be up for the British to request a transfer and for Jamaica to accept it…

          * The balance of the funding for the new prison will have to be identified by the GOJ and could include proceeds from the disposal of the Tower Street Correctional Centre and St Catherine District Adult Correctional Centre.

          As noted before, except that the old prisons would not be the only source of the remainder of the funds it seems.

          – There are substantial benefits that would accrue to Jamaica:

          * This new facility would allow the Department of Correctional Services to abandon the 17th and 19th century prisons that house thousands of Jamaican prisoners – most of whom are not hardened criminals – in harsh, overcrowded and dilapidated facilities.

          * The new facility will be designed and constructed with a focus on rehabilitation, which should reduce the high rates of recidivism that now occur. It will benefit from modern architectural design and equipment that will increase both security and operational efficiency.

          * Downtown Kingston will have the opportunity for a large greenfield redevelopment on the thirty acres of waterfront land now occupied by the prison. A similar opportunity for redevelopment would be provided in Spanish Town.

          well the Minister didn’t seem to talk about making the places into green spaces/parks but rather having it as a greenfield project (i.e. land on which you can pretty much do anything).

        • I’ve also seen it mentioned elsewhere (http://www.jamaicanmateyangroupie.com/other-articles/told-ya-golding-rejected-prison-deal/) that only prisoners with 18 months left on their sentence would be transferred. Total cost per prison then would be US$14371.47 while the British are apparently providing a bit over US$27,850 per prisoner for resettlement and reintegration/rehabilitation.

        • I am sure I read that it would be prisoners with 4 years left on their time. I hear the MOU was in yesterdays Gleaner, which I dd not get and I cannot seem to find it online. If you do get a copy please post the link

        • I think that it was a misprint about it being in yesterday’s paper. I think it was the Thursday paper, same as the Observer.

          18 months v 4 years – well it remains to be seen. But the media have been somewhat shoddy. They reported it as £27 million (which seems to more to be something to do with some of the other British grants) before correcting it to £25 million. I won’t be surprised if it takes a while for the facts to be correctly verified.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: