Creative Action at Ministry of Labour: Make ‘em pay to work!

Join us as we charge Ontario Ministry of Labour employees fees to go to work. Strange? Not at all. Migrant workers have to pay thousands of dollars to work in Ontario, and its legal. If recruiters can make a quick buck off migrant workers, we can make a quick buck off the people who allow it. All you need is suit and a tie. Show up bright and early on March 22nd, around 7:30 or so in the morning.

Please fill out this form so we can send you all the details (its the shortest job application you’ll ever do): http://bit.ly/FeesfromMoL

Still unsure? Don’t worry. Recruiters aren’t licensed in Ontario, so anyone can do it! What’s even better is that recruiters can’t be held liable for what happens at work. So if these Ministry of Labour employees boss turns on them, its no skin off your back.

By our guessestimation (its pretty hard to get the facts) at least half off Ontario’s 120,000 migrant workers are paying between $3,000 and $10,000 to unscrupulous recruiters*. That’s could be as high as 1.2 billion dollars a year. Imagine how much more money could be made by the rich if we started charging the non-migrant workers too. Its an untapped opportunity and we need to take matters in to our own hands.

With few real ways to get into Canada permanently, migrants are forced to pay recruiters to come to Canada on a temporary basis. To do so, entire families get into debt. Here. they pay in to E.I., and CPP, but face insurmountable barriers . Health and safety protections are non-existent. Documents are seized and bosses are often abusive. All of this is allowed by provincial and federal laws. We won’t be treating the Ministry of Labour employees that badly.

** This is the first of many actions, if you can’t make it to this one, please sign up at http://eepurl.com/vFCG1 to hear about future ones**

March 22nd is the three-year anniversary of the passing of the Employment Protections for Foreign National Act (Live-In Caregivers & Others) aka EPFNA. EPFNA banned recruiters fees and seizure of documents from live-in caregivers but left out seasonal agricultural workers, and those in the temporary foreign worker low skilled program. Not only that, EPFNA has not been fully implemented to adequately support live-in caregivers and requires key amendments to ensure that it actually works.

* Two-thirds of caregivers in a survey by Caregivers Action Centre who arrived after EPFNA was enforced paid fees, averaging $3275. Filipino workers that MWAC organizations come in to contact with report paying a base fees of $5,000 while Thai workers report paying a base fees of $10,000.

www.migrantworkersalliance.org | www.facebook.com/MigrantWorkersAlliance | coordinator@migrantworkersalliance.org

 

Tensions mount on Mali-Burkina Faso border as cattle farmers vie for land

Malian farmers and livestock, forced south by conflict, put pressure on land and water resources in the borderlands

MDG : Mali : pastoralist Peul leads goats on the road to Massina, near Mopti

A Malian shepherd leads goats on the road to Massina, near Mopti, 2013. Photograph: AFP/AFP/Getty Images

The movement of hundreds of thousands of cattle from Mali is threatening peace across the border in Burkina Faso, where tensions are mounting as Malian refugee pastoralists come head to head with local agricultural farmers.

“They don’t even say hello, they don’t ask but they just take things,” said Hamidou Tamboura from Djibo, near the site of the refugees.

“They are hot blooded, and when their animals come on your land you cannot chase them away, as they receive protection from international organisations. We share the same vegetation and the water resources, but they get extra support.”

Nomadic tribes have crossed the porous borders of these large territories for centuries in search of pastures to graze their cattle, a phenomenon known as transhumance.

Farmers from Niger normally go to the Gao region in Mali between December and February for a special herb called bourgou. However, the security situation has prevented them accessing the region, and they remain stuck in Burkina Faso.

Meanwhile, cattle farmers from Mali, who are not usually part of the transhumance, are being forced south to Burkina Faso by the conflict, putting additional pressure on the same land occupied by the nomadic tribes from Niger. Many are afraid to return.

“Even though the Islamists have been defeated, we still cannot go back. The Malian army are killing the civilian population and many are being accused of sympathising with the Islamists,” said Idoual Ag-Bala, a refugee from Gao.

“We know there is not enough food and water for the animals in Burkina Faso. We’re hopeful for peace. As soon as there is peace we will go back.”

According to the UN high commissioner for refugees (UNHCR), about 47,000 refugees have crossed the border since Islamists took control of northern Mali in early 2012, some of them bringing their livestock with them.

Latest figures from Oxfam (pdf) estimate that between 100,000 and 200,000 animals have entered Burkina Faso, Mauritania and Niger. In one camp in Burkina Faso there are three animals for every person, said the report.

The large influx of animals has put considerable pressure on both land and water resources still recovering from the shock of the 2011 drought and the resulting Sahel crisis in 2012.

A May 2012 report by Réseau Billital Maroobé (pdf), a network of pastoral farmers across Africa, had already warned of the potential challenges posed by increasing refugee numbers.

“There is a big risk that we will run out of food and water. We need an early warning system so we can see where shortages might arise,” said Boubacar Cissé, director of Conseil Régional des Unions du Sahel (Crus), a farmer’s organisation that works in the Sahel region of Burkina Faso.

“The Ecowas [Economic Community of West African States] countries know that this needs a regional response. The Burkina Faso government said they will try and mobilise food for the cattle,” he said. “At the same time, we need to raise the awareness of the security forces in Mali so that they can distinguish between farmers and rebels.”

Crus has started to put out “antennas” around the region to monitor the migration of pastoralists, but little else has been done from the Ecowas side. “It’s almost like we need a UNHCR for cows,” said one aid worker.

Council votes in favour of motion to help undocumented residents

Chris Kitching, cp24.com,   Published Thursday, Feb. 21, 2013 11:04AM EST

City council has voted in favour of a motion that makes it easier for people without full and secure immigration status to access city services already available to legal residents of Canada.

According to advocates, the proposed measures within the motion make it easier for newcomers to receive aid from places such as food banks and access health, employment and recreation services, and ensure their children can attend local schools.

Syed Hussan, a spokesman for the Solidarity City Network, said there are about 400,000 people in Toronto who don’t have full immigration status.

City hall

Toronto City Hall is shown in this file photo. (The Canadian Press/Michelle Siu)

“These people live here, they’re part of our community,” Hussan told CP24 reporter Katie Simpson ahead of the vote. “They should be in our schools, they should be able to walk down the street to the food bank or a shopping centre or go into a shelter without fear of detention and deportation.”

Hussan, who was at city hall Thursday to watch council debate the motion, said that having the motion approved would help newcomers take one “small step” towards that goal.

He is also calling on the provincial and federal governments to eliminate restrictions.

The motion not only calls on improved access to city services, it also calls for the federal government to create a regularization program for undocumented residents, and asks the province to review its policies for provincially-funded services to ensure access to health care, emergency services, housing and other social supports.

“We need the province to join in, we need the federal government to make its moves and we need Toronto to set the path forward,” Hussan said.

Dozens of supporters, wearing yellow T-shirts reading “Access without fear,” attended the city council meeting to watch the vote.

By passing the motion, Toronto becomes the first city in Canada to have “sanctuary city” type policies, according to Solidarity City Network.

Read more: http://www.cp24.com/news/council-votes-in-favour-of-motion-to-help-undocumented-residents-1.1165807#ixzz2O5OI7lKb

Watch the Video Here:  Council votes in favour of motion to help undocumented residents | CP24.com.

Sudan: Families from South Sudan stranded in Khartoum

Man and children at the Shegara departure point in Khartoum, awaiting transport to South Sudan.

Man and children at the Shegara departure point in Khartoum, awaiting transport to South Sudan.

Thousands of South Sudanese families are stranded in Sudan’s capital Khartoum waiting for an opportunity to return home, but insecurity and lack of resources have been hampering efforts by humanitarian agencies to transport them safely back to their places of origin.

“Since the independence of South Sudan in 2011, scores of people have returned from Sudan but many are still waiting, stranded at numerous departure points,” said OCHA’s Head of Office in Sudan, Mark Cutts. “The humanitarian community needs more support to step up its efforts to help these people return home.”

Since the Comprehensive Peace Agreement was signed by Sudan and South Sudan in 2005, some 2 million people have returned to South Sudan, which became an independent country in July 2011. Over the last few years, humanitarian organizations such as the International Organization for Migration (IOM) have helped many families return home as well as provided the support that they needed to rebuild their lives in the world’s youngest country. In recent years, however, aid agencies’ capacities have been stretched by the emergence of new crises in the two countries, including in South Sudan’s Jonglei State and Sudan’s South Kordofan and Blue Nile States where millions of people have been forced from their homes by conflict.

Today, some 40,000 people are stranded at 40 different departure points across Khartoum, waiting for a truck, bus or a barge to take them south. “These points have basically become squatter camps and the people are living in squalor,” added Mr. Cutts.

During a recent visit by OCHA staff to two departure points in Khartoum, many people said they had sold most of their possessions in order to survive. They explained that the Government of South Sudan had encouraged them to go to the departure points, where they could be transported back. However, lack of funding for transportation and the closure of roads to South Sudan because of insecurity are hampering efforts to help these families return home. The outlook is bleak as roads are frequently impassable due to flooding during the rainy season from June to September, but many families continue to wait, living in poverty with very few resources.

“We have no schooling for our children, our husbands are not allowed to work and we are suffering a lot from a lack of help,” said Katarina who lives at the Soba-Kongor departure point in Khartoum. “What we need more than anything else is some help to go back home.”

“Ultimately the Governments of South Sudan and Sudan are responsible for the welfare and transportation of those stranded,” said the head of IOM in Sudan, Malke Dharmaratne. “We will assist wherever and whenever we can, but organized movements by road, rail and air need to stem from concerted government efforts.”

IOM is working with the Inland African Church to help transport small groups of people in the coming weeks, but the Governments of Sudan and South Sudan need to organize and fund larger scale returns. IOM stressed that this was vital to ensure the safety of the returnees.

Last April, a group of people on their way back to South Sudan were caught in cross-fire when conflict erupted in the Heglig area, along the border between the two countries. OCHA and humanitarian partners have been urging the Governments to help establish and respect safe transportation corridors.

In the meantime, humanitarian organizations are concerned about the families at the departure points.

“While we appreciate the efforts of the Government of Sudan, international organizations remain extremely concerned at the humanitarian conditions of those living at the departure points,” said the UN Refugee Agency’s Deputy Representative in Sudan, Francois Reybet-Degat, outlining the urgency of the situation and the need for a solution.

“Without the resumption of organized return movements to South Sudan, the lack of prospects for the majority of those wanting to return back home in safety and dignity is very troubling.”

From OCHA South Sudan

6 March 2013 – 4:49pm

Open doors to Syrian refugees, Canada urged

Turkey’s ambassador denies his country is holding up process

From CBC News

Posted: Mar 20, 2013 5:14 AM ET

Initial estimates from December suggest the number Syrian refugees could be more than a million by June.Initial estimates from December suggest the number Syrian refugees could be more than a million by June. (Mohammad Hannon/Associated Press)

Citizenship and Immigration Canada officials have said Canada can’t take Syrian refugees out of Turkey’s 17 camps because the Turkish government isn’t allowing any refugee to leave until the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) has made decision regarding their case.

Immigration Minister Jason Kenney toured two of the Turkish camps in January, and the government has announced it is contributing $1.5 million to the Red Cross/Red Crescent Movement to aid the refugees of the conflict, on top of $8.5 million in aid it has already provided.

While there have been calls for Canada to take in refugees from Syria, Canada is following the UNHCR recommendation that it is too early in the crisis to discuss resettlement.

Thair Hafez said he has been pleased with Turkey's response to Syrian refugees, but would like to see more from Canada.

Thair Hafez said he has been pleased with Turkey’s response to Syrian refugees, but would like to see more from Canada.(CBC)

Turkish laws at issue

A spokewoman for Kenney said Turkish laws regarding refugees are holding up any potential refugee claims.

“The fact is that Turkey does not allow potential refugees to leave the country, nor does Turkey issue exit visas, until the UNHCR has made a decision on their case and refers their case to a country for resettlement. The UNHCR has not made a decision in many cases, and is not referring any Syrian cases for resettlement,” Alexis Pavlich, press secretary to Jason Kenney, wrote in an emailed statement.

Citizenship and Immigration Canada spokeswoman Ana Curic had earlier said Canada’s hands are tied.

“We obviously understand the anxiety Syrian Canadians are feeling right now. Until they get a decision from the UNHCR they can’t even get out of Turkey — there’s nothing we can do, that’s Turkish law,” Curic said.

Ambassador disputes claims

Tuncay Babali, Turkey’s ambassador to Canada, said the claims are unfounded and that his government’s position has been misrepresented.

“We have no such decision at all, and people who are in the camps can leave freely, wherever they desire to go,” Babali said. “Turkey is ready to co-operate on this, and everybody in the camps is free to leave. There is no such characterization. It’s a misrepresentation.”

For Syrians with relatives in refugee camps, the confusion adds to the anxiety.

Syrian in Ottawa concerned for relatives

Thair Hafez owns a car dealership in the Ottawa neighbourhood of Westboro but recently took a risk, travelling to the heart of the Syrian civil war. He also visited relatives who fled to Turkey, where five large families are sharing a single apartment in the town of Reyhanli.

Hafez said he is grateful to Turkey but disappointed in Canada, where he’s lived for three decades.

“Canada as a country, they did not contribute but they can do better. In the past they helped Iraqis, the Lebanese, the Somalians, the Kosovans, the Bosnians,” Hafez said.

Syrian refugee numbers could increase by two or three times by the end of 2013 if Syria’s civil war continues, according to António Guterres, the UNHCR’s high commissioner.

In December, the UN estimated the number of Syrian refugees would reach 1.1 million by the end of June.

Furore over Australian detention of immigrant children

Close to 2,000 children are under some form of detention in Australia

 

“You cannot underestimate the human cost of detaining children,” Jeroen Van Hove, the coordinator of the  (IDC), an umbrella group of 258 members (including organizations) working in 50 countries around the world, based in Belgium, told IRIN, describing Australia’s detention regimes as one of the “harshest” in the world.MELBOURNE, 5 March 2013 (IRIN) – Australia is failing in its international obligations to protect the rights of close to 2,000 children now in immigration detention, say rights groups and legal experts.

“You cannot underestimate the human cost of detaining children,” Jeroen Van Hove, the coordinator of the  (IDC), an umbrella group of 258 members (including organizations) working in 50 countries around the world, based in Belgium, told IRIN, describing Australia’s detention regimes as one of the “harshest” in the world.MELBOURNE, 5 March 2013 (IRIN) – Australia is failing in its international obligations to protect the rights of close to 2,000 children now in immigration detention, say rights groups and legal experts.

“You cannot underestimate the human cost of detaining children,” Jeroen Van Hove, the coordinator of the International Detention Coalition (IDC), an umbrella group of 258 members (including organizations) working in 50 countries around the world, based in Belgium, told IRIN, describing Australia’s detention regimes as one of the “harshest” in the world.

“The current detention policy causes serious damage to these children and has been criticized internationally for its human rights violations.”

According to Australia’s Department of Immigration and Citizenship, as of 1 March there were 1,983 children (under 18) in immigration detention, including 998 in secure locked facilities and 985 detained in the community (the preferred option for children as it allows them to live in community-based accommodation without the need to be escorted outside a locked facility).

Of these, 281 are detained on Christmas Island (off the coast of Indonesia), while a further 34 are on remote Manus Island in Papua New Guinea (PNG) as part of the government’s controversial offshore processing efforts.

Activists there describe conditions as “overwhelmingly inadequate”.

This is a “blatant violation of international norms and arguably in breach of a range of UN Conventions,” Linda Briskman, a professor of human rights at Swinburne University, charged. “There is a mounting body of evidence, particularly from mental health professionals and researchers that reveals the terrible harms resulting from the detention of children.”

Mental health impact

Asylum advocacy groups in Australia have long raised concerns following reports of self-harm and trauma experienced by children in low-security facilities.

In February, an Australian-based organization, the Darwin Asylum Seeker Support and Advocacy Network (DASSAN), received reports from the Immigration Department under Australia’s Freedom of Information Act detailing self-harm among children at two Darwin detention centres.

Outside a Darwin detention centre

“These reports explain there were 26 self-harm incidents in Darwin centres from August 2010 to November 2011. The youngest child was only nine years old and he took an overdose of Panadeine, knowing what the full effects on him would be,” DASSAN coordinator Fernanda Dahlstrom said.

This was despite the fact that the Darwin airport lodge is considered more humane than other processing centres, she added.

“These cases aren’t isolated. More children are suffering the same psychological side effects as a result of detention in other facilities. We just don’t officially know the numbers,” said Leila Druery, a spokeswoman for ChilOut, an advocacy group for children in immigration detention in Australia.

“We would like to see the issue of detaining children depoliticized, by giving an independent children’s commission an oversight and guardianship role,” Druery explained, in reference to the current conflict of interest where the immigration minister is the sole person who decides if his own department is acting in the best interests of the child.

The Australian Red Cross echoes these concerns on placing children in detention centres for unknown periods of time while their refugee status is processed.

“[The] Australian Red Cross believe community-based detention for asylum seekers is a humane and sustainable alternative to the use of secured detention facilities and arrangements,” the Red Cross said in a statement.

“Evidence shows that when people spend long periods in immigration detention facilities, not only does their health suffer, but also their ability to cope and their psychological well-being.”

Rights of the child

Legal experts in Australia point to the responsibilities the government has under its international obligations, including as a signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC).

“Perhaps, the most obvious treaty breach is that of CRC. Clearly, maintaining children in detention for long periods of time does not treat their welfare as the paramount consideration,” said Stephen Keim, a Brisbane barrister and the president of Australian Lawyers for Human Rights.

Keim noted that when the periods of detention were long and indefinite so as to affect the mental health of the children involved, or the conditions are unsatisfactory, “issues of cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment arise,” which is prohibited under the Convention Against Torture, the CRC and the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights.

According to CRC, the detention of children should be used “only as a measure of last resort, for the shortest appropriate period of time and taking into account the best interests of the child.”

In February, a report by the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child asked states to “expeditiously and completely cease the detention of children on the basis of their immigration status”.

The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) has also expressed deep concern over the treatment of children in the Manus processing centre, which was reopened on 21 November 2012 in PNG.

“The mandatory detention of 34 children and their families at the Centre is particularly troubling for us,” said UNHCR regional representative Richard Towle.

The UNHCR report released on 4 February 2013 following a visit to the Manus Island facility noted that: “When viewed against the applicable international legal standards, it is clear that the current situation for detained children is profoundly unsatisfactory and UNHCR is therefore of the view that it is not currently appropriate for children to be transferred to Manus Island.”

Immigration remains a divisive issue in Australia

Duty of care

Refugee policy has long been a divisive issue in Australia, even though the country receives a small number of refugees annually compared to other countries including the USA, France, Germany, Italy, and Sweden.

In 2011, Australia received 15,441 onshore asylum applications, just 0.92 percent of the 1,669,725 applications received across the world, the Refugee Council of Australia reported.

However, according to Australia’s current labour government, the government is committed to ensuring people held in immigration detention are treated with dignity and respect and that children are always accommodated in the least restrictive form of detention accommodation available.

“No-one wants to see children in detention for long periods, which is why children have priority processing and the department endeavours to process their claims quickly,” said Brendan O’Conner, Australia’s minister for immigration and citizenship, in a statement provided to IRIN.

“The Australian government has a duty of care to ensure the health and wellbeing of children in immigration detention – including ensuring access to appropriate physical and recreational activities and excursions and education,” added O’Conner.

At the same time, all irregular maritime arrivals have to be detained while their “identities, health and reasons for travel are ascertained”.

Meanwhile, the Greens, a minority party that currently holds the balance of power in the Australian Senate, are campaigning for policy change when it comes to placing children in detention.

“Some of these children have spent their whole lives behind bars, having committed no crime other than being born in a country from which they are forced to flee,” said Senator Hanson-Young, who visited the detention centre in Manus Island in February.

“The government needs to end this cruel regime of indefinite detention.”

Since January 2013, most of the 1,382 irregular maritime arrivals were asylum seekers arriving by boat from Iran, Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Pakistan.

Check out The Centre for Imaginative Ethnography!

As we use it, the term “imaginative” refers to a recognition of imagination and creativity as central and significant in human social relations, and a commitment to open-ended inquiry that can embrace risks, challenges to orthodoxy, and unintended outcomes.

Read more …

BLOG

Encounters in Canada: Contrasting Indigenous and Immigrant Perspectives

MAY 15–17, 2013

Chestnut Conference Centre

89 Chestnut Street
Toronto, ON
M5G 1R1

The conference website can be viewed at http://crs.yorku.ca/encounters

For directions, please visit this link: http://chestnutconferencecentre.utoronto.ca/contact

To register online, please click HERE

Indigenous peoples are the original caretakers of Canada, but their encounters with settlers have been marred by assimilation and territorial dispossession over hundreds of years. The result has been significant alienation between Indigenous peoples and Canadian governments. Conversely, immigrants to Canada, which for the purposes of this conference include early colonists, recent immigrants, refugees and displaced persons, have often viewed the country as a haven or land of opportunity. However, many are sorely unaware of Indigenous history, rights and contributions to Canada’s development. No people or community can speak for another; individual and group knowledge is intrinsic and internal. However, in keeping with the ideal of “mutual sharing” emphasized in the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, respect and trust can be fostered through shared difference. While the specific experiences of Indigenous peoples, immigrant communities, refugees and Canadian-born citizens are very different on many levels, connections can be developed through dialogue and reciprocity. Indigenous peoples as well as immigrant and refugee communities experience discrimination, racism, stigmatization and marginalization. These encounters represent a wider systemic problem in Canadian political, legal, sociocultural and historical contexts. Efforts to overcome exclusion can be built through increased awareness and knowledge-building, with support from allies.

This conference aims to fill this gap in knowledge and will bring together leaders from government and the judiciary, legal scholars, academics and practitioners to formulate practical solutions. The primary objective is to build bridges – cultural, political, intellectual and social connections – between those who share the lands of what is now Canada. The underlying rationale of the conference stems from the fact that Canada is now shared by Indigenous peoples, descendants of early settlers and more recent immigrant and refugee communities. These communities encounter Canada in very different ways based on racial identity, ancestral heritage, cultural background, community belonging, language and spiritual practice. Bridging the chasm that exists between Indigenous peoples and all newcomers, whether early or contemporary immigrants or refugees, is urgently needed in order to end discrimination and achieve equitable quality of life for all who live in this country. To this end, the objective is to understand how Indigenous peoples and various immigrant groups experience their lives in Canada. How are the challenges they face different? Are there shared goals and experiences upon which to build future alliances to achieve improved quality of life in Canada?
Conference papers are expected to be published subsequently in an edited volume, and topics will relate to the following broad themes:

(1) “Colonialism versus Consent”: Indigenous peoples have been and continue to be negatively impacted by colonialism. They did not consent to assimilation or territorial dispossession. Early settlers and contemporary immigrants and refugees generally have chosen to make Canada their home; this choice was not imposed on them. In the context of colonialism and consent, what have been the contrasting experiences of Indigenous peoples versus settler/immigrant/refugee communities?

(2) “Exclusion and Identity”: Indigenous peoples have faced centuries of exclusion and assimilation on their own lands. Early settlers did not face these forms of discrimination, but new immigrants and refugees often experience life on the perimeters of Canadian society. How are these experiences of race and identity different or similar? Are there similarities in how Indigenous peoples and immigrant communities maintain or revitalize their cultures and languages? Could encounters with exclusion and discrimination become points of “shared difference” between Indigenous peoples and immigrant communities? If so, is there the potential for building alliances?

(3) “Place and Displacement”: The role of “place” is a vital component of identity. Spiritual and cultural attachment to the land is a predominant component of most Indigenous identities. Similarly, displacement and attachment to home significantly impact life experience, sense of security and the physical and mental well-being of immigrants and refugees who come to Canada. Are there similarities between the territorial dispossession experienced by Indigenous peoples in Canada and refugee communities? What are the impacts of forced migration, especially for those communities who seek to revitalize, recreate or reinvent their identities after losing a sense of “place”? How is “place” experienced by immigrant groups who voluntarily or actively choose to reside in Canada?

(4) “Nationalism and Alienation”: Any form of exclusion or discrimination is apt to result in alienation. While experienced differently and in different contexts, Indigenous peoples and immigrant/refugee communities are often alienated from the Canadian mainstream. This perpetuates disadvantage, erects barriers between communities and highlights the differences between “others”. How should the myriad of different national identities be respected in Canada? How should the original contributions of Indigenous peoples be recognized?

(5) “Recognition and Respect”: Recognition of difference – historical, cultural, political and social – is a vital sign of respect for a people or nation. Many who live in Canada are unaware of the distinctive histories and contributions of Indigenous peoples. Many are also unaware of the cultures and values of immigrant and refugee communities. What should be done to promote awareness and appreciation of the different groups that share what is now Canada? What might recognition of difference look like in legal, political and cultural contexts, and how would recognition differ for Indigenous peoples versus immigrant/refugee communities in practice? How should the differing cultural practices, histories and identities of Indigenous peoples be promoted and respected? In contrast, what should Canadians learn about immigrant and refugee communities?

(6) “Relationship-Building and Community Engagement”: Indigenous peoples face an alarming array of dire problems, akin to third-world conditions in an otherwise prosperous country. Immigrant and refugee communities also often contend with poorer quality of life than the “average” Canadian. How are these experiences different? What needs to be done to remedy these problems? Is relationship-building and reconciliation the answer for Indigenous peoples, and if so, what should approaches look like? Can and should alliances be forged between Indigenous peoples and settler/immigrant communities, both early and recent? How and in what contexts (i.e. legal, political, cultural, social) should all communities be actively involved in the creation of their futures?

All questions concerning the conference should be directed to the principal academic organizer, Dr. Jennifer Dalton, Assistant Professor, School of Public Policy & Administration, Faculty of Liberal Arts & Professional Studies, and Centre for Refugee Studies Scholar (jedalton@yorku.ca). Interested participants may also contact the members of the Conference Organizing Committee: Dr. David McNab, Associate Professor of Indigenous Thought and Canadian Studies, Departments of Equity Studies/Humanities, Faculty of Liberal Arts & Professional Studies (dtmcnab@yorku.ca); Dr. James Simeon, Acting Director, Centre for Refugee Studies, and Associate Professor, School of Public Policy and Administration, Faculty of Liberal Arts & Professional Studies (jcsimeon@yorku.ca); Dr. H. Tom Wilson, Professor, Faculties of Graduate Studies, Law and Liberal Arts & Professional Studies, and Senior Fellow of McLaughlin College (htwilson@osgoode.yorku.ca).

In light of the most recent (ongoing) elections in Kenya, will the IDP issue be resolved?

KENYA: Fours Years On IDPs Remain in Camps

  • by Peter Kahare (Rift Valley, Kenya)
  • Tuesday, January 24, 2012
  • Inter Press Service

Six-year-old Victor Muruga points to a hole in the bush that he calls his ‘bedroom’. ‘I sleep there, under that tree and my mother sleeps under that blanket,’ says Muruga.

Victor Muruga (r) and his three-year-old brother Ian Kimani (l) prepare lunch from their camp at 
Mumoi farm. - Peter Kahare/IPS
Victor Muruga (r) and his three-year-old brother Ian Kimani (l) prepare lunch from their camp at 
Mumoi farm. – Peter Kahare/IPS

Muruga is in a jovial mood as he prepares lunch for the family. The bubbly boy, his three-year old brother Ian Kimani and their mother had to initially spend five days in the bush after being transported here to Mumoi farm, enduring the scathing sun and biting cold as they waited for the government and Kenya Red Cross Society to provide them with tents.

Muruga’s family are among the 4,000Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) affected by Kenya’s 2007/2008 post-election violence who live here on Mumoi farm in Subukia Township, 200 kilometres north west of Nairobi. Four years after the violence, they are yet to be allocated their one-hectare piece of land that the government promised all IDPs.

The families living on Mumoi farm want the 1,2 hectare farm, but the government refuses to buy it for them, saying that they had been relocated there illegally.

‘The ministry does not intend to buy that land because it is rocky and unsuitable for farming, and the government was not involved in moving them there,’ Permanent Secretary in the Special Programmes Ministry, Andrew Mondo, told IPS.

Mondo says that other government ministries like the Ministries of Land, Agriculture, Water, Roads and Education need to be involved in assessing and endorsing the land, and settling IDPs.

In the country’s 2011/2012 budget allocation, Finance Minister Uhuru Kenyatta set aside 60 million dollars for resettling IDPs. However, the process of resettlement has been characterised by corruption, tribalism and hostility to the IDPs.

Early last year, the government launched an investigation into a missing two million dollars that had been set aside for the resettlement IDPs, which had allegedly been misappropriated by officials in various ministries and even representatives of IDPs.

The 2007/2008 post-election violence displaced over 660,000 people, over half of whom were displaced in the Rift Valley Province. While more than 300,000 families have returned to their farms, and their ethnic homelands in Central, Nyanza and Western Provinces, some have sold the homes they were forced to flee from and bought land elsewhere.

There remain over 15,000 families displaced by the post-election violence awaiting their land settlements in Rift Valley Province, the largest province in Kenya. Each family has an average of five children.

‘These are the people we recognise, plus the 5,710 families evacuated from the Mau Forest in 2009 who are camping in three major camps along the forest boundary,’ Mondo says.

But the Mumoi farm IDPs refute allegations that they are not victims of the post-election violence and claim that the government wanted to resettle them in Central Province against their will. Naivasha Member of Parliament, John Mututho, then facilitated the relocation of the IDPs to Mumoi farm, claiming that the government had failed to resettle them.

‘The government told all IDPs in the country to identify suitable land for themselves and alert the concerned ministry if they find it. That is what we did. We found this land and the seller is willing to sell it to us,’ Ibrahim Kihara, spokesperson for IDPs at Mumoi farm, told IPS.

Last week, Mututho petitioned the high court to allow him to resettle IDPs. He has also sued the government for sabotaging the IDPs resettlement exercise.

But not everyone is happy that politicians have become embroiled in the row to resettle IDPs. A group of over 2,000 displaced persons from the country’s largest camp atMawingu took to the streets early January to protest against being taken advantage of by politicians.

They also condemned Mututho for calling on IDPs to squat on private land.

‘Politicians should stop misleading the IDPs, and politicising the resettlement issue to get votes in the forthcoming elections,’ Osman Warfa, the Provincial Commissioner for Rift Valley Province, told IPS.

Another politician, Luka Kiagen, a Member of Parliament for Rongai Constituency, in the Rift Valley Province, has been leading a section of elders to complain over the settlement of IDPs in Rongai.

He claims that 10,000 people from the Kikuyu community had settled in Rongai at the expense of the largely Kalenjin community who had been evicted from the Mau Forest.

‘People displaced from Mau Forest who are residing along the border have been forgotten in the resettlement programme,’ Kigen told IPS.

The government maintains that there was no discrimination in the resettlement exercise.

‘Such allegations are unfounded. It is not by choice that members of the Kikuyu community are the largest number of IDPs,’ Mondo told IPS.

Non-governmental organisations and civil societies have blamed the government for the continued delay in resettling IDPs.

‘The IDPs issue has exposed the intolerance and divisions among communities. The government has not been willing to clear this blot on the face of Kenya. It has failed in upholding the constitution that guarantees security and accommodation for all Kenyans by false promises for four years.

‘The government claims that there is no land for relocation. But look at the thousands of acres owned by politicians and lying idle in the country. Can’t they be bought by the government at least to settle the IDPs?’ Ndung’u Wainaina, director of the International Center for Policy and Conflict, told IPS.

In December 2011 the government created a task force mandated to fast track the resettlement process. But Peter Kariuki, the coordinator for the IDPs National Network, says that four years down the line this is ‘too little too late.’

 

© Inter Press Service (2012) — All Rights Reserved

Original source: Inter Press Service