I have read the statement issued by the Jamaican Consulate regarding comments made by me at the recent forum hosted by the Chamber of Commerce to discuss the proposed amendments to the Immigration Law.
This forum was but one of several public appearances made by me in an effort to explain the provisions of the draft amendments to the Law so as to allow the public a reasonable opportunity to provide feed back to the Government during the consultation period.
I have stated many times before that a true understanding of the need for the Term Limit policy on work permits (also known as the rollover policy) is not possible without knowing both the statistical information relating to foreign nationals living and working in these islands as well as the significance of that information when broken down into its component parts.
Consequently, it is not possible to have any meaningful public discussion on this or other immigration issues without reference to those numbers.
Because Jamaicans represent an overwhelming majority of all foreign nationals working here (approximately 50 per cent) it is virtually impossible to discuss the topic without referring to that nationality. The same would be true of any nationality that represented such a dominant percentage of the work force and, by extension, of the population of these islands as a whole.
Regrettably, the public debate that is now taking place should have occurred 25 years ago when decisions on this and other important immigration matters could have been decided and resolved without the extraordinary challenges that now face us.
I have at great personal and financial sacrifice over the course of the last 14 months worked on immigration matters in these islands with a view to ensuring that over the long term the Cayman Islands would remain a desirable place to live and work for everyone who resides here, including the many Jamaicans who have become Caymanians and call these islands home.
It was certainly never my intention to insult anyone in the process and to the extent that the Jamaican community may or do feel that my remarks were insulting to them then I have no hesitation in apologizing for that. At no time, as far as I recall, did I ever say that allowing Jamaican dependents in would cause Cayman to be a welfare state.
The number of potential dependents that may well accompany the thousands of persons who would ultimately become Caymanian in the event the rollover policy was ever abandoned is hugely significant to these islands for, amongst other reasons, the impact that may be brought to bear on the educational system. To ignore them in this debate would be a serious oversight.
In dealing with the statistics I have tried to interpret not only the current significance of them but also what they may mean over time in the absence of a roll over policy and I would encourage everyone living here, but particularly Caymanians, to give serious consideration to them. Your future and that of your children will depend upon it.
We all have a stake in getting this right and it will, of necessity, involve very frank discussion at times. I note that in his statement Mr. Hamaty makes mention in passing of several matters he feels ought to be taken into account before the Law is amended but enquiries by me of the Cabinet Office have disclosed that no written representations have been received from him in respect of the draft Bill during the month set aside for public input.
I would therefore like to take this opportunity to encourage him even at this late hour to place in writing the details of his suggestions and forward them to me as soon as possible. I will ensure that they are passed on to the Cabinet for its consideration.
David E. Ritch
Related Videos
